Muslim teachers to challenge Indian state’s madrasa ban in top court

Indian Muslim students recite from the Quran in Jama Masjid Wazeer-un-Nissa during the month of Ramadan at Madrasa Imam Anwaarullah in Hyderabad on June 14, 2016. (AFP/File)
Short Url
Updated 26 March 2024
Follow

Muslim teachers to challenge Indian state’s madrasa ban in top court

  • Article 30 of India’s Constitution guarantees the right of minorities to run educational institutions
  • Around 2.6 million students in Uttar Pradesh receive education at Muslim religious schools

Muslim teachers said on Tuesday they would appeal a verdict by a court in Uttar Pradesh, which has effectively banned Islamic schools in India’s most populous state.

Last week’s ruling scraped a 2004 law governing madrasas in Uttar Pradesh, with the Allahabad High Court saying it violated India’s constitutional secularism and ordering that students be moved to conventional schools.

Islam is the second largest religion in Uttar Pradesh, accounting for some 20 percent of its 230 million population. Around 2.6 million students in the state study at Muslim religious schools, according to the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madrasa Education data.

“We are going to the Supreme Court, no doubt about it. The Allahabad High Court’s ruling is unconstitutional, it violates Article 30 of the Constitution that allows for minorities to run own educational institutions,” Wahidullah Khan, secretary-general of the All-India Teachers Association Madaris Arabia, told Arab News.
“We have hope that the Supreme Court will give us justice.”

Madrasas provide a system of education in which students are taught Qur’an, Islamic history and general subjects like math and science.”

“Teachers are highly qualified in madrasas. What is the point of putting the kids in different schools? Our kids are as good in English education as kids in normal schools,” said Azaz Ahmed, president of the Islamic Madrasa Modernization Teachers Association of India, which also plans to challenge the high court’s ruling.

Ahmed said he was hopeful that despite the Uttar Pradesh chief minister’s announcement, the state’s government would step in to prevent the dismantling of Islamic schools.

“We are planning to approach the Supreme Court, but what we need is immediate relief. Hope the government takes some prompt action and finds a way out,” he said.

Iftikhar Ahmed Javed, chairman of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madrasa Education and member of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, told Arab News the state’s administration was also discussing whether the verdict should be challenged in the top court.
“I feel that the verdict should be challenged in the Supreme Court. But this decision must come from the chief minister, education minister and big bureaucrats,” he said.

“The verdict is a big setback.”

Javed said most madrasa students in the state came from poor backgrounds and the schools offered them education for free. They were also no burden on the state budget as out of nearly 25,000 madrasas, only 560 receive government funding.
“They are run on zakat or donations,” Javed said. “If the madrasas get closed, then poor people will be the victims, particularly girls who will not be encouraged to go to any other school … If you attack education, then society gets diminished, and this is the challenge before us.”

Another challenge will be getting his party’s government on the same page.
On Saturday, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, also a BJP member, told Indian media his government respected the court’s order and would implement it in phases.

For Asad Rizvi, a political commentator in the state’s capital of Lucknow, it was not likely that Adityanath would backtrack on the plan.
“In Uttar Pradesh, long before the Allahabad High Court verdict, there have been consistent attempts by the state government to disturb Muslim primary education,” Rizvi told Arab News.

“Just before the Allahabad High Court verdict, the government terminated the contracts of all those teachers who were teaching science in madrasas. Those teachers were both Hindu and Muslims, and Muslim kids were the beneficiaries.

“Muslims who can’t afford education, even in government schools, used to get basic education in these madrasas. Madrasas have been playing an instrumental role in advancing the country’s literacy rate.”


Israeli firm loses British Army contract bid

Updated 9 sec ago
Follow

Israeli firm loses British Army contract bid

  • Subsidiary Elbit Systems UK’s campaign for $2.6bn program was marred by controversy
  • Senior govt civil servant overseeing contract was dined, handed free Israel tour

LONDON: A UK subsidiary of Israeli weapons giant Elbit Systems has lost its bid to win a prominent British Army contract, The Times reported.

The loss followed high-profile reporting on controversy surrounding Elbit Systems UK’s handling of the bid.

The subsidiary led one of two major arms consortiums attempting to secure the $2.6 billion bid to prepare British soldiers for war and overhaul army standards.

Rivaling Elbit, the other consortium led by Raytheon UK, a British subsidiary of the US defense giant, ultimately won the contract, a Ministry of Defence insider told The Times.

It had been decided following an intricate process that Raytheon was a “better candidate,” the source said.

Elbit Systems UK’s controversial handling of its contract campaign was revealed in reports by The Times.

A whistleblower had compiled a dossier surrounding the bid that was shown to the MoD last August, though the report was privately revealed to the ministry months earlier.

It alleged that Elbit UK had breached business appointment rules when Philip Kimber, a former British Army brigadier, had reportedly shared information with the firm after leaving the military.

Kimber attending critical meetings at the firm to discuss the training contract that he had once overseen at the ministry, the report alleged.

In one case, Kimber was present in an Elbit meeting and sitting out of view of a camera. He reportedly said he “should not be there,” according to the whistleblower’s report.

In response to a freedom of information request, the MoD later admitted that it had held the dossier for seven months without investigating its claims. Insiders at the ministry blamed the investigative delay on “administrative oversight.”

A month after being pushed on the allegations by The Times, a senior civil servant completed an “assurance review” in September and found that business appointment rules had not been breached.

Other allegations concerned lunches and dinners hosted by Elbit UK in which civil servants at the heart of the contract decision process were invited.

One senior civil servant was dined by the British subsidiary seven times, while rival Raytheon did not host events.

Mike Cooper, the senior responsible owner at army headquarters for the army training program, also traveled to Jerusalem with two senior British military officers.

He took part in a sightseeing tour funded by Elbit Systems, the British subsidiary’s parent company.

In response to the allegations, an MoD spokesperson said in a statement: “The collective training transformation programme will modernise training for soldiers to ensure the British Army can face down the threats of the future.

“We will not comment further until a preferred tenderer announcement is made public in due course.”

Amid mounting criticism of Israel within the British military establishment, four former senior army officers, in a letter to Prime Minister Keir Starmer, recently urged the government to end involvement with Israeli-owned or Israeli-supported weapons companies.

“Now is not the time to return to business as usual with the Israeli government,” they wrote, urging harsher sanctions.