The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) of India filed an affidavit on Wednesday before the Supreme Court of India in the ongoing case regarding the constitutionality of the “Madrasa” education system. The affidavit flagged concerns about the quality of education imparted at such institutes.

The NCPCR was primarily concerned with the discrepancy in the quality of primary education afforded by mainstream institutions, which are governed by the Right to Education (RTE) Act, as opposed to the Madrasas, which fall outside the ambit of the RTE Act. The affidavit stated that:

Madrasa works arbitrarily and runs in an overall violation of the Constitutional mandate, RTE Act and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. It cannot be overlooked that a child getting education in such an Institution will be devoid of basic knowledge of school curriculum which is provided in a school. A school is defined under Section 2(n) of the RTE Act, 2009, which means any recognised school imparting elementary education. A Madrasa being out of this definition have (sic) no right to compel children or their families to receive Madrasa education.

The right to education (for individuals between six and fourteen years of age) is a constitutionally guaranteed right under Article 21A of the Constitution, which was inserted in 2002 by the Eighty-Sixth Amendment. This Article delegates the legislative role of determining the contours of this right to the Parliament. Thus, the Parliament passed the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act (RTE Act) in 2009. Apart from defining the right to education, this act binds all primary-level educational institutions to certain responsibilities in how they function and set their curriculum.

The Uttar Pradesh Board of Madrasa Education Act, 2004 (UPBME Act) established the body of the same name, which would go on to establish a number of institutions providing Madrasa education. Under the Act, “Madrasa Education” was defined as “education in Arabic, Urdu, Persian, Islamic-studies, Tibb Logic, Philosophy and includes such other branches of learning as may be specified by the Board from time to time.” The nature of this education system is religious.

Earlier this year, the Lucknow Bench of the High Court of Judicature of Allahabad passed a judgement which struck down the UPBME Act as unconstitutional for violating the principle of secularism. The court was also concerned about the nature of education being imparted at these institutions, observing that “education being imparted in Madarsas [sic] is neither ‘quality’ nor ‘universal’ in nature.” However, in April, the Supreme Court granted a stay order on this judgement until it decided the matter for itself.

The NCPCR is a national government body which is mandated to protect children’s rights across the nation. It has a special focus on children who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and find it more challenging to access quality education and a safe and nurturing environment that caters to their holistic growth. One important field that NCPCR focuses on is access to quality primary education.