ISLAMABAD: In contrast to the forum’s 2019 position, in which traditional madressah boards agreed to give the federal education ministry some degree of authority, the Ittehad Tanzeemat-i-Madaris Pakistan announced on Tuesday that seminaries would continue to be independent and not become a part of any government department.
The announcement followed a joint delegation’s visit to JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s home in Islamabad to show support for the JUI-F leader, who is currently pressuring the government to publish a gazette notice for the Societies Registration (Amendment) Bill 2024, which would revoke the 2019 agreement and give the district administration the power to register seminaries.
While the fifth board is affiliated with seminaries governed by Jamaat-i-Islami, the combined delegation represented madressah boards from the Barelvi, Deobandi, Shia, and Ahle Hadith schools of thought.
Mufti Taqi Usmani claimed in a statement following the meeting that the boards’ collective decision to submit to the education ministry’s administrative control was made under duress because, at the time, they believed it was preferable to be under the ministry’s authority.
Seminaries in Pakistan, unlike those in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt, would continue to be independent, according to Mufti Usmani.
Similar to the conventional madressah boards, the MQM changed its position on seminary registration. According to Khalid Maqbool Siddiqui, the party’s chief, the MQM will back the Maulana on this matter.
Following a meeting at his home, he called on the government to move forward with the proposed legislation by eliminating needless obstacles at a joint press conference with Maulana Fazl.
A few days prior, Mr. Siddiqui, who is also in charge of the federal education portfolio, had described the issue as “a matter of national security” while sitting with other government ministers and clerics to oppose the measure at a government-sponsored conference.
The JUI-F leadership, flanked by MQM leaders, blasted the government on Tuesday for causing problems, claiming that the law was approved by parliament but that the president had obstructed it. The JUI-F leader went on, “We demand its gazette notification, and if any amendments are required, they can be done later.”
NA session
Both the government and the JUI-F appeared to support negotiations in the National Assembly to resolve the dispute over the planned legislation.
Azam Nazeer Tarar, the minister of law, acknowledged that the Societies Registration (Amendment) Bill 2024 had caused a legal complication and suggested that Maulana Fazalur Rehman meet with the government to resolve the matter.
The law should have been taken up by parliament in a joint sitting at that time, the minister said, acknowledging that a true complexity had been created following the president’s speech on October 28, when the bill was originally returned to the speaker.
He stated that the matter would be settled in accordance with the Constitution. “Let us sit together and go through the letter of the president containing objections and see whether the bill will be taken to the joint sitting or will go through in its current form,” he said.
The prime minister had instructed senior party leaders, including himself, Ishaq Dar, and PM’s adviser Rana Sanaullah, to meet with the Maulana and resolve this matter, according to the law minister. Any other prominent leader from affiliated parties, such as Syed Naveed Qamar of the PPP, might also participate in the exercise, Senator Tarar continued.
He went on to say that rather than a majority, the Societies Registration (Amendment) Bill 2024 was enacted by consensus. “We own the bill, regardless of the correctness of the provisions it mentions, but legal considerations must also be made.”
JUI-F leader Maulana Fazalur Rehman stated in a lower house speech that the National Assembly and the Senate have approved the bill. He went on to say that following the president’s objections, the administration ought to have sent the bill to a joint sitting.
The bill was returned with objections, but he was shocked that it was not put to the joint sitting within ten days. Nevertheless, he stated, “We are prepared for the government to discuss it if they so choose.”
