When a Place of Learning Becomes a Place of Fear

A child is sent to an educational institution with an expectation that the adults there will protect, guide and prepare them for life. Parents entrust teachers with something far more precious than academic progress: the safety and dignity of their children. When that trust is betrayed through sexual abuse, the crime extends beyond the suffering of an individual child. It exposes a failure of the institution, the community and the systems that are supposed to protect the most vulnerable. The reported sexual abuse of children in madrasas across Bangladesh demands precisely this broader examination.

According to Justice Makers Bangladesh France (JMBF), at least 109 children were sexually abused in 72 incidents in madrasas during the first nine months of 2026. The organisation also recorded 131 cases of rape and attempted rape involving boys and girls nationwide during the same period, leaving 171 victims, including 161 victims of rape and 10 of attempted rape. These figures are deeply disturbing, but they must be understood for what they are: documented cases that reveal the scale of a problem without necessarily capturing its full extent. Sexual abuse, particularly when the victims are children, frequently remains unreported. The actual number of victims may therefore be considerably higher.

The most troubling aspect of these reports is not simply the number of incidents. It is the contradiction between what educational institutions promise and what some children experience within their walls. Madrasas, like schools and other residential educational institutions, are entrusted with the intellectual, moral and spiritual development of children. Yet no institution can claim to cultivate morality while failing to safeguard the bodily autonomy, dignity and security of its students. Religious education does not automatically guarantee ethical conduct, just as secular education does not. The character of an institution must ultimately be judged by how it treats those who depend on it, especially those who have little power to defend themselves.

This is not an argument against madrasas or religious education. It is an argument against allowing any educational institution to place its reputation above children's safety. Most teachers and administrators may fulfil their responsibilities conscientiously, but the existence of dedicated educators cannot excuse institutional negligence where abuse occurs. Nor should allegations against individuals become grounds for condemning an entire educational tradition. The necessary distinction is between protecting an institution's legitimate educational mission and protecting the institutional interests of those who might wish to conceal wrongdoing. These are not the same thing.

One reason child abuse can persist is that educational authority is often treated as a form of unquestionable moral authority. In some settings, teachers and senior students exercise considerable power over younger children, particularly those living away from their families. A child may depend on an authority figure for food, shelter, education, discipline and social acceptance. Reporting abuse can consequently feel like challenging the entire structure on which the child's daily life depends. Fear of punishment, disbelief, humiliation or expulsion may silence victims long before any formal complaint reaches the authorities.

The vulnerability of boys deserves particular attention. Social attitudes about masculinity often make it harder for male victims of sexual abuse to disclose their experiences. A boy may fear being ridiculed, blamed or perceived as weak. Families may hesitate to discuss the incident because of concerns about social stigma, while institutions may be tempted to minimise allegations to avoid reputational damage. Such pressures turn silence into a second form of victimisation. The child suffers the original abuse and then confronts a social environment that makes speaking about it seem more shameful than committing it.

This is why child protection cannot depend on the assumption that victims will eventually come forward. A safeguarding system must recognise that children often lack the vocabulary, confidence and freedom necessary to report abuse. They need age-appropriate education about bodily autonomy, personal boundaries and inappropriate behaviour, alongside clear explanations of whom they can approach for help. Teaching children about good and bad touch can contribute to awareness, but it cannot transfer the responsibility for preventing abuse onto children themselves. No child should be expected to protect themselves from an adult or authority figure who exploits their dependence.

The responsibility rests first with institutions and the adults who operate them. Every madrasa, school and residential educational facility should have a clearly defined child protection policy, an accessible complaints mechanism and a procedure for responding promptly to allegations. Staff recruitment and supervision must be strengthened, and allegations involving teachers, administrators or senior students must be referred to competent authorities rather than handled exclusively through internal disciplinary arrangements. Independent oversight is particularly important because institutions cannot always be expected to investigate allegations against people who exercise influence within their own organisational structures.

The legal process presents another serious concern. In the case of Abdullah, a 10-year-old madrasa student whose body was found hanging in Banasree, Dhaka, in May, his mother filed a case alleging sexual assault and abetment to suicide. A senior student was arrested, but the reported lack of visible progress in the case nearly seven months later raises questions about the pace and effectiveness of justice. The case must be assessed through proper investigation and judicial procedure, but its significance extends beyond the question of individual culpability. When a child's death and the allegations surrounding it fail to produce visible progress, public confidence in the protection system inevitably suffers.

As legal experts have pointed out, weaknesses in evidence collection can undermine the prosecution of child sexual abuse cases. The absence of sufficiently clear and consistently implemented procedures for medical examinations, sample collection, forensic testing and evidence preservation can make it more difficult to establish what happened. Evidence in such cases is often time-sensitive, and procedural mistakes can compromise investigations before they reach court. A credible response therefore requires specialised training for medical professionals, investigators and prosecutors, as well as coordinated protocols that protect both evidentiary integrity and the dignity of the child.

However, stronger procedures alone will not resolve the problem. Justice also depends on whether complaints are taken seriously, investigations are conducted without interference and cases move through the legal system without unnecessary delay. Allegations must be investigated fairly, accused persons must receive due process, and proven offenders must face appropriate legal consequences. At the same time, children and their families need access to medical care, psychological counselling and legal assistance. A prosecution may punish an offender, but punishment cannot by itself restore a child's sense of security or address the lasting consequences of abuse.

The media also has a responsibility in this regard. Reporting on child sexual abuse must inform the public without exposing victims to further harm. Publishing identifying details, circulating graphic material or presenting allegations as established guilt before judicial determination can violate privacy, deepen stigma and compromise justice. The public interest lies in exposing institutional failures, examining patterns of abuse and demanding accountability, not in turning a child's suffering into a spectacle. The identity and dignity of victims must remain protected throughout the process.

Ultimately, the question Bangladesh must confront is whether child protection is treated as an enforceable obligation or merely as a moral aspiration. Institutions cannot demonstrate their commitment to children's welfare through religious instruction, mission statements or assurances of good intentions alone. They must establish systems that make abuse harder to commit, easier to report and impossible to dismiss without scrutiny. Government authorities, educational boards, institutional administrators, families and civil society must work together to make these safeguards effective.

_____________________________________________________