By Isma’il Hashim Abubakar
Schools established, owned and run by non-state actors and private institutions have, no one doubts, been providing a veritable substitute to the dilapidated public schools which have been suffering from wanton neglect by governments at various levels in Nigeria. Private schools have successfully, though not completely, reduced the burdens on governments to supply basic education for children in their public schools, which have been perpetually operating under the shadows of existential threat.
Although people of all social strata now have more faith in private schools and parents with even the meanest incomes and most fledgling source of earning, who always struggle to make ends meet, prefer to take their children to commercial schools at the behest of other life comforts, public schools, which serve as the last option for the extremely downtrodden, still seem to get congested due to the high number of enrollments of children from low-income families. If this indicates anything at all, it shows that people have now fully embraced modern education, and they can sacrifice the expensive things they have just to secure a quality formal education for their wards and children.
While, as everyone knows, public schools tend not to have too many demands apart from the meagre or more affordable tuition fees, their private counterparts, in most cases, operate in such a way that many parents inwardly feel that the system is tilting more toward a business direction in an obvious capitalist fashion, despite that the dominant pretension of both parents and school managers is that of purely imparting knowledge and building sound character to the young and upcoming generation.
Many schools are extraordinarily excellent in both transmitting sound knowledge and instilling good morals in pupils, and as such, no material gratification can remunerate their work or compensate the teachers for their hard work, dedication and commitment toward discharging their duties and keeping good custody of what has been entrusted to them. In fact, some well-to-do parents often give gifts to teachers as an expression of gratitude for feeding their children with sound knowledge, which is primarily the responsibility of the parents but perfectly undertaken by the teachers on their behalf. As such, many parents may not bother with and will gently turn blind eyes to some straitjacketed and arbitrary financial demands that most commercial schools are now introducing day in and day out.
Some schools go beyond decorum and do not, in the least, pretend to be shy to depict their operation as a purely extortionate venture, deemphasizing the moral and instructional dimensions which their institutions are set upon. Parents now no longer feel at ease after having settled school fees which are the most basic financial burden that comes to everyone’s minds once private schools are mentioned. Not only do textbooks and instruction materials represent the source of anxiety that parents grapple with, but virtually everything which a school stipulates, largely with a marketing mindset. While most schools impose decrees that make it binding upon parents to buy textbooks, stationeries and all other instructional materials from the schools, some schools turn it into a rule that pupils and students must never be allowed into schools wearing uniforms supplied to them by their parents through all other channels apart from the tailoring unit of the schools.
Schools do complain that external tailors often violate dress codes and principles earmarked by the schools, including non-compliance with size, width and length but above all, the lack of authority to manufacture and issue official badges that are glued to uniforms. Hiding behind this pretext, schools have seized the free will of parents to transact with tailors of their choice, and because they aspire for their children to acquire quality education, they relinquish their right and bow down to the pressure of the schools.
There is, however, no guarantee that the tailoring units of schools themselves are perfect for designing the most fitting and immaculate school attire for pupils. Having taught at both primary and secondary schools (as well as university), I have personally seen pupils wearing school-supplied uniforms that never matched or fully fitted the bodily structures of the pupils. If this is the case, this particular rule might have been informed more by a business instinct and less by a concern to preserve institutional dress codes. Parents of final year students who could only afford to pay for either WAEC or NECO exams for their children, which by the way, is better than missing both of them at once, are coerced by some schools to move heavens and earth to pay for the two exams or risk having their children removed from the list of graduating students. When they could not settle for the fees of the two exams and require the refunds of their money, they hardly recuperate more than half of what they have paid.
Perhaps the most brazen example of such pecuniary impositions manifests in the demands of some schools on parents to pay internet charges, which would have been understandable and justified if pupils or students were engaged in regular computer lessons that are punctuated at close intervals by visits to websites. Alas! There are schools which extort this surcharge even from parents of nursery pupils, and the only justification for it is the data consumed by Whatsapp groups of parents initiated by the schools on which an administrator often sends announcements.
Many parents relate with schools while they are inwardly burnt due to how things have become in private schools, but because they envisage a better future for their children, they prefer to remain mute and only murmur their complaints on the rarest occasions or when they meet with fellow parents by the roadsides. The best opportunity for them to communicate or even express their squawks loudly to the schools is during periodic parents-teachers meetings, but the schools have been, paradoxically, hijacking and making platforms to further advocate their fiendish and self-aggrandizing policies. Their covert strategy is to appoint a loyal, docile and exceedingly compliant head of Parent-Teachers’ Association (PTA), and to gag his mouth for fear of being influenced by nonconformist parents, the schools bribe him with some free scholarship slots for his children. As a result, he weakens and sabotages any attempts by the parents to rise and challenge arbitrary extortions they suffer from these schools.
Other schools have different, perhaps more treacherous strategies of navigating intricacies and tackling eventualities that may come up owing to this venture, such as giving undertaking papers for parents to sign before the children are accepted at the stage of enrollment, and many parents are carried away by the desire for the admission of their children and often don’t pay commensurate attention to these documents or mull over their future implications. The question that, however, is seldom asked, what is the legality of these modes of institutional marketing practices that have become norms in not only purely western-style schools but also model Islamic schools? To what extent do these operations comply with Islamic teachings and principles, and what are the business dimensions of these dealings which should then ideally be done and looked at from the viewpoint of Islamic commercial and financial regulations?
First of all, everyone knows what schools are primarily meant for, which is imparting knowledge and this should be the apex among all the operations that are expected to exist in the schools. Hence, from this prism, school fees are the most obligatory financial demands that parents are, by default, owed to schools and upon which any compromise will be a favour that the schools could grant or deny at will. Any other charge or tax is secondary and gains its legitimacy according to how it complements the primary function of schools, but, above all, it should be done in a transparent atmosphere defined by mutual agreement and understanding. In other words, selling textbooks, stationery and instructional materials at schools should be governed by Islamic commercial laws, without discrimination or thinking that schools could do as they will without referring to Islamic stipulations. If this is the case, then these materials sold to parents must be on the basis of freewill and agreement and not impositions that may result in penalties.
Of course, many schools publish exercises and textbooks with their names and logos finely inscribed, which then makes it compulsory for parents to obtain the materials in no other places but the schools. Many other schools, meanwhile, retail the materials from markets and sell them to parents at exorbitant prices that at times double or triple the normal market prices. All these are normal and should be considered lawful businesses if only it is done with a mutual agreement such that parents have the liberty to buy either from the schools or at markets, or in the former case, if the materials are not sold arbitrarily at unimaginable prices just because of the inscriptions of logos and names.
The general Islamic principle that confers legitimacy or otherwise to any business venture is free will and mutual agreement, and interestingly, this is explicitly postulated by the Qur’anic verse and Hadith, the two most fundamental sources of Islamic law. Allah says:
“Yā ayyuha alladhīna āmanū lā ta’kulū amwālakum bainakum bi al-bāṭil illā an takūna tijāratan ‘an tarāḍin minkum. Wa lā taqtulū anfusakum. Inna Allaha kāna bikum Raḥīma”.
“O you who believe! Eat not up your wealth among yourselves unjustly except it be a trade by mutual good-will: Nor kill (or destroy) yourselves: for verily Allah has been to you Most Merciful!” [Sūrat al-Nisā’: 29].
In his groundbreaking exegetical work al-Taḥrīr wa al-Tanwīr, the prolific commentator of the Qur’an, Muḥammad Ṭāhir Ibn ‘Āshūr posits that the prohibition to eat up people’s wealth without mutual agreement is paired with the crime of murder in the verse to draw Muslims’ attention on the gravity and heinousness of such a practice. He argues that it is emphasized because people do not largely consider it something significant and the victim is usually powerless and could hardly resist (as it occurs in private schools).
Moreover, in an authentic Ḥadith narrated by Anas bin Mālik, the Prophet (SAW) says, “lā yaḥillu mālu imri’in Muslimin illā ‘an ṭībi nafsin”. (It is unlawful to take a Muslim’s wealth except with his goodwill). [Dāru Qutnī, 3/26].
As asserted earlier, a lot of transactions in private schools are imposed upon parents, and school authorities often warn parents and even threaten to apply penalties when these marketing ventures are observed in the breach, leaving no room for a bargain and mutual consent that would ordinarily prevail in open transactions. Since this is the case, only a few people will contest the illegality of this practice. Needless to say, some officials and authorities, including ironically, of schools paraded as Islamic models, are, to some extent, oblivious of the legal status of their policies, although this is not a valid, genuine and acceptable reason. A Muslim is, after all, and before anything else, principally required to be fully conversant with the pros and cons of any action he undertakes.
One of the easiest ways to make amends and rectify this wrong tradition, irrespective of how well consolidated it is, how difficult it may be to refrain from or how odd our argument may sound to some, is to be so transparent and open to parents and gear the deal to be dictated by consent and mutual agreement. Freewill and mutual agreement are pivotal in any financial dealing and they determine whether it is done lawfully or unlawfully.
And since schools, especially the religious ones, enjoy respect from parents, it will hardly be burdensome to mutually arrive at some understanding, and this, as beautifully ratiocinated by Ibn ‘Āshūr, could lead to the implementation of the divine principle that “if they give up willingly to you anything of it, then take it in satisfaction and ease” (fa in ṭibna lakum an shai’in minhu nafsan fakulūhu hanī’an marī’a) [Sūrat al-Nisā’, 4].
Indeed there is a need for governments to intervene and reintroduce guidelines that will neither oppress the schools nor allow them to do as they like, pertaining to their financial dealings with parents. Parents in Kano, for instance, will certainly look back with nostalgia at the era of Governor Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, who laid down modalities that checkmated arbitrary extortions of parents by commercial schools. He formed a formidable committee that regularly went around schools and observed their operations to ensure they complied with state regulations, most of which were meant to shield masses from further extortions.
Unfortunately, Kwankwaso’s successors did not maintain the tempo, and now things are, to say the least, almost getting out of control. School authorities would increase school fees at will and would rush to mention inflation as a cause and the need to better the condition of their staff, while in essence, it is the proprietor and a few notable among his cliques that would end up enjoying while flowing pittance to and leaving the majority of staff to keep on wallowing in despondency.
Ismail writes from Rabat, the Kingdom of Morocco and can be reached via ismailiiit18@gmail.com.
