The modernising of madrasa education has been much discussed, and many madrasas today offer subjects to match contemporary curricula, such as languages, mathematics, the sciences and social sciences. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, however, has submitted to the Supreme Court that the education in madrasas is not comprehensive. These schools are outside the formal system and therefore unsuitable. Children are deprived of the right to receive elementary education and other rights such as midday meals and uniforms. The NCPCR listed the sections of the Right to Education Act violated by madrasas. It said that the few National Council of Educational Research and Training text books that are taught in madrasas are a mere ‘guise’ and there is no standardisation or care for quality education. The central issue prompting these concerns is religious teaching. Sometime back, the Supreme Court had stayed an Allahabad High Court order scrapping the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act. In that context, the Supreme Court had said that the chief concern should be the quality and standard of education; it should be such as to allow students to sit for open competitive examinations and lead dignified lives.
But the NCPCR has brought forward a far more serious complaint. Some madrasas are alleged to be promoting terrorism and engaging in anti-India and pro-Islam activities. Identifying the Darul Uloom Deoband Madrasa in UP and its branches elsewhere as a source of such activity, the NCPCR has claimed that by exposing children to hatred towards their own country madrasas were causing them mental and physical suffering. As evidence, the NCPCR has cited the Deoband’s website, which carries a fatwa about the invasion of India. The NCPCR’s approach is puzzling. The submission condemns all madrasas not only for the lack of proper education but also for producing terrorists. This ignores the madrasas which have updated curricula and implies, moreover, that seminaries and schools that are associated with a particular minority religion are dangerous. If the concern is about education, then it is expected that a rights body would mention those madrasas where teaching is not standardised and suggest means of change. If the concern is terrorism then extensive proof would be necessary. Surely the NCPCR would not use children’s rights as a mere ‘guise’?