EDITORIAL: With President Asif Ali Zardari finally signing the Societies Registration (Amendment) Act 2024 pertaining to madrassa registration, a matter that had the potential to morph into a serious conflict between the government, and a significant section of the clergy and religious parties seems to have been thankfully resolved.
The passage of the law was immediately followed by the president also issuing an ordinance to amend the Societies Registration Act, giving seminaries the option to register either with the Directorate General of Religious Education (DGRE) or at the relevant deputy commissioner’s office.
It must be recalled that this matter arose due to the government’s desperation to get the 26th Amendment passed back in October, and in order to get the vital support of Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s JUI-F for that controversial piece of legislation, it agreed to the party’s demand to transfer authority for seminary registration from the DGRE, where it had rested since 2019, to deputy commissioners.
While parliament subsequently passed the Societies Registration (Amendment) Bill to fulfil this commitment, the president’s refusal to sign it into law sparked much backlash as this was perceived by the JUI-F and the traditional five madrassa boards aligned with it as a betrayal of the government’s promise.
While the JUI-F and the traditional madrassa boards remained adamant regarding their demand for seminary registration, with there being threats of street agitation if this wasn’t met, the newer madrassa boards registered with the DGRE since 2019 insisted on maintaining the status quo.
The government’s solution to appease both sides, therefore, has averted what could have turned into a serious confrontation, not just between the government and the traditional madrassa boards, but also between the traditional boards and the newer ones registered with the DGRE.
This could have sparked serious divisions and unrest in a country already reeling under much political turmoil and polarisation. In that context, the government’s move is a highly welcome one as it seems to have successfully defused a potential crisis.
The resolution of the matter also attempts to address the entirely valid point raised by the president when the bill was originally presented to him, as he had stressed that altering the procedure of registering seminaries could invite adverse action by international bodies such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) which, in turn, could have had grave consequences for the economy and our global standing.
As the new law requires seminaries to have their accounts audited and submitted to the relevant registrar, hopefully the country’s FATF status and other critical international obligations will remain intact.
Nevertheless, there are several important lessons to be learnt from this entire episode. First, the practice of passing unpopular legislation with far-reaching implications – as was the case with the 26th Amendment – by relying on the backing of those who demand their pound of flesh even if it is at the cost of the national interest can have damaging consequences, and thus must be abandoned.
Second, the tendency to bulldoze laws through parliament solely on the back of a numerical majority and bypassing rigorous scrutiny by the appropriate parliamentary committees inevitably results in poorly crafted laws with unintended and often harmful repercussions.
And third, while the seminary registration issue may have been resolved, it underscores a troubling reality: those in power remain susceptible to manipulation, and even coercion, by the clergy.
Our battle against extremism is too vital to allow for this vulnerability to persist. It is, therefore, essential that the government ensures that all safeguards in the new law — mandating financial audits and regulations regarding their curricula — are strictly enforced. A certain degree of governmental oversight into madrassa affairs must be maintained.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments