After the deadly Taleban attacks on a Peshawar school, the government chalked out a National Action Plan (NAP) as a multi-pronged strategy to counter the menace of terrorism in Pakistan. A key element of the strategy is to enforce stricter rules regarding registration and regulation of madrassas, or religious seminaries, in the country. The government’s renewed commitment to introduce madrassa reforms has, rather unsurprisingly, met with stiff resistance from a madrassa coalition body and religious political parties. The initiative has been rejected as part of a wider US and foreign funded conspiracy against religious institutions in Pakistan. This is not for the first time that Pakistan is attempting to introduce controversial madrassa reforms. Back in 2004, Gen. Musharraf faced stern opposition from religious political parties and madrassas federation for the establishment of Pakistan Madrassa Education Board to oversee their curriculum and integrate them with the formal education sector, and job market. The program largely failed to deliver on its objectives as it lacked trust and major religious boards did not support the reforms. The issue of madrassa reforms remained sidelined in subsequent years as successive governments tried to harmonize relations with religious parties.
It is time that Pakistan approaches the issue of madrassa reforms in a smarter manner, keeping in mind some ground realities of the country. While there are no credible statistics related to the mushrooming growth of madrassas, some estimates suggest that more than 1.5 million children are enrolled in over 50,000 religious seminaries across Pakistan. While some madrassas are known to fuel terrorism, they fill a large void in Pakistan’s inequitable society. The madrassas are an important support system for the society’s poor as they provide free religious education, boarding and lodging facilities. Without the safety net provided by these seminaries, these students would end up homeless, struggle for existence in the society and eventually become disillusioned. With a deep sense of deprivation, they could fall into hands of extremists or indulge in other criminal activities.
In a more focused approach toward these proposed reforms, the government should probe the militancy links of different seminaries. Some of the seminaries remain unregistered with the government and are known to have established militant training centers that provide manpower for suicide attacks. Action should be taken only against such institutions that preach extremism and violent sectarian ideologies. The government itself admits that only 10 percent of the seminaries are involved in supporting and funding terrorism.
The fight against terrorism requires a complete change in the mindset. Madrassa reforms should not be perceived as being taken at behest of outsiders but as part of a struggle for Pakistan’s existence. All religious parties, madrassas federation and government must reach a consensus to immediately shut down seminaries that support terrorism. There is need to develop a cordial working relationship between all stakeholders so that action may be expedited against the dubious religious institutions. As trust develops between the two sides, any impressions that Sharif government is forcefully trying to control the seminaries can be dispelled.
