NCPCR exposes rights violations and extremism in madarsa education

In a shocking revelation, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has filed a complaint before the Supreme Court of India that the education system in madarsas in India is fundamentally flawed. The commission added that the madarsas violate the right of children to education as prescribed by the Constitution of India. According to NCPCR, “madarsa education seriously hampers the right to education of children in India and has no constitutional basis to be sustained in terms of the Right to Education Act or under Article 21A of the Constitution.”

The Influence of Darul Uloom Deoband: A Path to Extremism?

In its submission, NCPCR exposed the deep-rooted influence of Darul Uloom Deoband on madarsas. The commission described it as a “school of thought with a very strict and conservative interpretation of Sharia.” The NCPCR further stated that “extremist Taliban groups have also claimed that they were influenced by the religious and political ideologies of Darul Uloom Deoband, which has a menacing presence in madarsas.” The Children’s Rights Commission’s claim raised concerns about the possible radicalisation of students in madarsas.

Children deprived of formal education and basic rights

The committee pointed out that children studying in madarsas are deprived of their fundamental rights under the Right to Education Act (RTE), 2009. They are denied access to standardised education, mid-day meals and trained teachers. The committee pointed out, “In the absence of the RTE Act, students studying in madarsas are also deprived of the facilities and rights provided to students studying in regular schools.” The NCPCR further added that there is a serious problem of corporal punishment in madarsas. The children are taught about the supremacy of Islam and there have been cases of sexual abuse of minors on the premises of madarsas.

The commission said that madarsas, being minority institutions, enjoy exemptions that violate “the fundamental right to equality before the law (Article 14); the prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth (Article 15(1)); that children are provided with opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that children and youth are protected from exploitation and from moral and material abandonment (Article 39(f)) and that this also interrupts the responsibility of the State under Article 13(2) not to make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred under the fundamental rights and that any law made in contravention thereof shall, to the extent of the violation, be contravened.”

Non-Muslim students in madarsas: a case of religious coercion

Another shocking revelation by NCPCR suggested that a significant number of non-Muslim students were enrolled in madrassas, in violation of Article 28(3) of the Constitution of India. The revelation, coupled with the allegation that these institutions promote Islamic teachings, suggests that these Islamic institutions are violating Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. The NCPCR argued that “preventing children from professing a religion other than Islam amounts to a violation of Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.”

Offensive Content in the Curriculum: Promoting Extremist Views

The NCPCR also took cognizance of the books prescribed in madarsas through fatwas issued by Darul-Uloom-Deoband. One fatwa states that “Taqwiyat-ul-Iman is an authentic book,” a text known for its rigid views on Islam. The committee found that some teachings in madarsas contain texts that talk about the supremacy of Islam, raising concerns about indoctrination. Further, the NCPCR found that certain books used in madarsas contain guidelines on inappropriate relationships with minors. This raises several ethical and legal concerns regarding the madarsa education system.

The committee said, “The committee has received complaints regarding the fatwas issued by Darul Uloom Deoband, which contain references to a book titled ‘Bahishti Zewar’. It is pertinent to mention here that the said book contains content which is not only inappropriate but also offensive and illegal with regard to children as it contains text on entering into a sexual relationship with a minor. The book is also said to be taught to children in madrassas and further fatwas containing such offensive information are available to all.” The book was removed from the website of Darul Uloom Deoband after notification from NCPCR in 2023.

The commission pointed out that a fatwa regarding ‘Ghazwa-e-Hind’ was also part of the Darul Uloom Deoband website. The NCPCR said, “The commission has also taken cognizance of another objectionable content on the Darul Uloom Deoband website, in which a fatwa talks about the invasion of India (Ghazwa-e-Hind) and how whoever is martyred in it will be a great martyr.” NCPCR said that issuing such fatwas as an educational institution “exposes children to hatred against their own country and ultimately causes them unnecessary mental and physical suffering.”

Constitutional abuse and lack of oversight

The committee pointed out that Article 29(2) of the Constitution is being misused by madarsas to justify their practices. The committee said, “Madarsas serve as the primary institutions for teaching Islamic studies, that is undeniable.” NCPCR alleged that this exemption is not in keeping with the broader constitutional imperative of providing children with a balanced and formal education, and accused these institutions of operating “under the veil of Article 29(2) of the Constitution of India.”

Judicial oversight must correct ‘serious misconduct’

The NCPCR has challenged the actions of Anjum Kadri, who filed a petition in the Supreme Court of India challenging the Allahabad High Court verdict quashing the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madrasa Education Act, 2004. The commission said the Act violated the principles of secularism and the constitutional mandate of Articles 14, 21 and 21A.

It is notable that the Supreme Court verdict was stayed by the top court headed by CJI DY Chandrachud. The court held that while there was a legitimate interest in ensuring quality education, it did not seek to nullify the law.