Chairman, Institute of Objective Studies &
General Secretary, All India Milli Council
The
right to education is part of the internationally recognised human
rights. Universal declaration of Human Rights in 1948 first recognised
this as a basic human right. As a corollary, this right has been
incorporated in various international conventions and plans. A vast
majority of countries has signed up to, and ratified, international
conventions concerning this right, most importantly the UN Convention on
the Rights of the Child. However, despite ratification and undisputed
desirability of this right, very few countries have incorporated it in
their domestic legal framework or created administrative frameworks to
ensure realisation of this right.
India has enacted The Right of
Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 for ensuring free
and compulsory education to children between the age of six and
fourteen. This is a significant legislation. Realisation of the right to
education to every child shall, indeed, be an important advancement of
the society in general and weaker sections in particular. It is obvious
that education shall enable people to develop skills, capacity and
confidence to strive for realisation of other rights.
However, we
should also keep in mind that this right to education does not mean
that any education would be sufficient to fulfill our aspirations.
Former UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education, Katarina
Tomasevski, had said that for education to be a meaningful right it must
be available, accessible, acceptable and adaptable.
In the Indian context, the scheme of the Act, we may describe these 4 A�s in the following terms:
Availability
� means that education is government-funded, free, and there are
adequate number of schools and trained teachers who may ensure quality
education to a child in his neighbourhood.
Accessibility
�means that the education system is accessible to all without any
discrimination, but ensures positive steps for the marginalised sections
of the society.
Acceptability � means that the
education curriculum is relevant and of good quality with cultural
acceptability for all, especially the minorities.
Adaptability � means that the education serves needs of the society and its suitable to specific contexts like religious education, etc.
In
my opinion, the Act, in the present form, not only disregards all the 4
A�s but is violative of the rights of the minorities guaranteed under
the Constitution. Without considering ground realities, the Act provides
difficult and impractical standards.
For example, the RTE Act
makes it compulsory for all schools to maintain a student to teacher
ratio of 30:1. As per various surveys, schools in India are struggling
with a ratio of 50:1 (and some schools with 80:1), while there are many,
including those run by the government, which have just a single
teacher. There are 5.23 lakh teachers� positions that are vacant while
almost equal number of untrained teachers are employed at the primary
level. How those teachers will be trained to make them qualified as per
the norms prescribed by the RTE within the next five years is the moot
question.
Accessibility is another problem. We have been
witnessing fast commercialisation of school education. Instead of
increasing government spending on school education, the RTE Act contains
provisions making it compulsory for all private, unaided and minority
schools to reserve 25 percent of total seats in elementary education for
underprivileged and financially weak children.
The Act also
provides stringent financial and legal punishments for violation of the
clause making 25 percent seats reserved. However, while making this
provision in the Act, rights of the minorities guaranteed under Article
29 and 30 of the Constitution were completely ignored.
Another
important area that was not considered by the government was the
madarsas, and other institutions imparting religious education. The
Scheme of the Act has been such that a total ban would have been imposed
on all institutions imparting religious education.
Almost all
Muslim and other minorities� organisations have been raising their voice
on these issues. Earlier, the HRD Ministry had on January 15, 2010
issued guidelines exempting madarsas and other religious education
institution. However, the guidelines could not have overridden the
provisions of the Act. Therefore, the demands for amending the Act
continued.
Besides, the Muslim Personal Law Board and other
Muslim organisations, Muslim members of parliament also put pressure on
the government to bring in amendments to the Act itself so that these
issues could be addressed. In December 2011, the government agreed to
bring in amendment to the Act, exempting madarsas, Vedic pathshalas and
other institutions imparting religious education from the purview of the
Act.
Further, the demand for respecting rights of the minorities
under Article 29 and 30 of the Constitution has also been accepted. An
amendment making modified application of the law to the minority
educational institutions is also going to be moved. It has been agreed
that the provisions of the Act shall apply to the minority educational
institutions subject to the provisions of Articles 29 and 30 of the
Constitution. The government has further agreed that the School
Management Committee, constituted under Section 21 of the Act, shall
perform advisory functions only.
The HRD Minister has promised to
move these amendments to the RTE Act in the coming Budget Session of
Parliament. Let us hope that this shall be done.
Further, one
more amendment that needs to be made pertains to the children studying
in madarsas, Vedic pathshalas and other institutions imparting religious
education.
Such children, who are studying in madarsas, Vedic
pathshalas or other institutions imparting religious education, their
guardians and parents should not be subjected to any disability, penalty
and punishment for non-compliance with any provision of the Act or
rules made thereunder.
This is a logical and consequential amendment that the government should agree to incorporate in the amending Act.
There
are many other challenges of general and practical nature, like
allocation of funds, commercialisation of school education, etc., that
requires serious deliberation by the government, educationists and other
planners to make the right to education a really meaningful right,
especially for the poor and marginalised, and save this law from
becoming an act of tokenism. g
No comments:
Post a Comment