Debate on the National Action Plan (NAP) is in full swing nowadays with one of the major points of concern being madrassa (seminary) reforms, an effort to bring some sort of checks on the mushrooming growth of these religious schools. In 1947, Pakistan had less than 300 madrassas. By 1988, it had less than 3,000 but now we have around 26,000 registered ones. Estimates on unregistered madrassas vary from 10,000 to 15,000. In the capital alone, upwards of 160 madrassas and 72 day scholar Quranic institutes are not registered with government authorities. Presumably, NAP has the registration of seminaries in Pakistan as one of its biggest priorities. However, it needs to be remembered that this is not the first time that the Pakistani state has attempted to introduce these reforms.
Reforms in madrassa education have been underway for some time; post-9/11, the US and other western countries forced the Pakistani government to take immediate measures in this regard. Since then, irrespective of being elected or non-elected, the government has been trying to introduce some reforms to the madrassas but these have failed to materialise in any substantive efforts due to differences between the government and the madrassa authorities.
The issue of madrassa registration is a very important one in the current debate. However, it remains to be seen how the NAP will approach this problem in a way that is different from past attempts. Historically, madrassas were registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860 as charity organisations but requirements for registration were removed in 1990. During the Benazir Bhutto era, the government banned the registration of seminaries because it wanted to change the system but it could not do so. Resultantly, registration remained closed for many years and the government propagated that madrassas were not willing to register themselves. During the Musharraf era, negotiations started with the madrassas in the ambit of the Societies Registration Act 1860 under which they were registered since 1950.
In the backdrop of reforms, the government initially drafted the Model Deeni (religious) Madaris and Madrassa Board Ordinance 2001, and the federal cabinet passed it on June 21, 2002. According to the ordinance, the government would issue a gazette notification for the establishment of the Pakistan Madaris Education Board, which would ostensibly modernise the education system, setting up model religious schools and approving their affiliations on the recommendation of the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII), the official mouthpiece of the state on religious matters. The board visualised getting authority to set curriculum and examination systems, and to hold teacher training programmes. However, implementation remained dismal; only 449 madrassas were registered out of the almost 25,000 under this law, while only three model madrassas could be established throughout Pakistan.
In June 2002, the government drafted the Voluntarily Registration of Regulations Ordinance 2002 and passed it through the federal cabinet but it could not be promulgated as then President Pervez Musharraf could not sign this decree due to strong resistance from the madrassas. Through this ordinance, the madrassas would have been asked to register themselves voluntarily while foreign financial assistance was banned for them. In October 2004, as a next step, the government introduced the Government Madrassa Reforms Programme 2004. According to this, besides religious subjects, English, Mathematics, Social Studies and General Science would also have ostensibly been included from the primary to the secondary level while English, Computer Sciences, Economics and Pakistan Studies were to be taught at the higher level. This programme remained unsuccessful.
After a long discussion amongst stakeholders, the government promulgated the Societies Registration (Amendment) Ordinance 2005 for the registration of seminaries. This ordinance was the amended form of the Societies Registration Act 1860. This act stipulated that every madrassa would give an annual report of its activities to the registrar. The madrassa would also have to present a report of the annual budget as well as receipts of its revenue and expenditure. No madrassa would presumably teach or publish any literature or material that promoted terrorism, sectarianism or religious hatred. All the madrassas were to be registered and none could be established and run without registration. However, the ordinance did not work out in its intended spirit and the madrassas rejected survey forms from the office of the interior ministry on the grounds of non-fulfillment of the agreed conditions. The Ittehad Tanzeemat Madaris Pakistan (ITMP), the umbrella body representing madrassas, resented this perceived intervention by the government, claiming that the government was seeking credentials from the seminaries. The ITMP claimed that information about any seminary would be sought through the Wafaq Board instead of the government, and said any interference in the working of madrassas would not be tolerated.
Registration of madrassas is actually a problem due to the presence of unregistered or ‘ghost’ madrassas. The total number of madrassas affiliated with the Wafaq is approximately 28,000; besides them a large number of unregistered madrassas are also working. Scores of unregistered seminaries escape the scrutiny of the government since they are usually built as an ‘additional’ room of a mosque where students get Nazira Quran and Hifz lessons. The mushrooming of unregistered madrassas is a severe problem for the government. There is no credible information for the number of unregistered madrassas, particularly since these are generally located in remote areas. Thus, many such ghost madrassas escape detection. Detecting them will have cross cutting implications in which the stakeholders will be reluctant to register or will attempt to hide such madrassas from official scrutiny, and may even mobilise religious street power in protest if steps are forcibly taken. Religious entities in Pakistan may not have electoral power as analysts are fond of saying but certainly can and have mobilised very effective street power in furtherance of religious or social agendas. This has so far mitigated the impacts of any proposed reforms since 2005 whereby it was unclear what was needed to be done to control the madrassas to curb terrorism, and what substantive reforms were needed to upgrade this education system.
It needs to also be remembered that the state had reiterated its resolve earlier too in the form of the National Internal Security Policy (NISP), promulgated more than a year ago. Under this, the National Counter Terrorism Authority (NACTA) was mandated to carry out the registration of madrassas. Presumably, the NAP would build upon this but the reality is that NACTA, till date, remains powerless and without resources, an organisation on paper. The NAP is silent about the roadmap of these reforms; presumably it should have built upon NISP’s edifice but the lack of policy direction emanating so far is revealing. Without setting out the framework of lucidly thought out madrassa reform, the NAP may just go nowhere as did the NISP regarding these reforms.
The writer is a retired inspector general of police and ex head of NACTA