State Deemed Obligated to Fund Islamic Boarding Schools
The Majelis Masyayikh has asserted that the state holds a constitutional obligation to fund pesantren education, as these institutions are an integral part of the national education system. This view was presented by the Majelis Masyayikh as a related party during a judicial review hearing of Law Number 18 of 2019 concerning Pesantren at the Constitutional Court on Wednesday (3/6). The case is registered under Number 75/PUU-XXIV/2026.
Chairman of the Majelis Masyayikh, Abdul Ghofarrozin, stated that the issue within Article 48 of the Pesantren Law lies not only in the phrase ‘in accordance with the state’s financial capacity’ but also in the phrase ‘assisting the funding of pesantren operations’. He argued that the use of the word ‘assisting’ positions the state merely as a provider of aid, rather than a party with a constitutional duty to fund pesantren education.
‘Pesantren perform educational functions as part of the national education system. Therefore, the state cannot be positioned merely as a party that assists, but must hold the constitutional responsibility to fund them,’ Abdul Ghocarrozin stated in his remarks on Wednesday.
The Majelis Masyayikh maintains that since the state recognised pesantren as part of the national education system through the Pesantren Law, all constitutional consequences regarding education apply to them. The institution cited Article 31 of the 1945 Constitution, which regulates the state’s obligation to organise and develop the national education system. In their view, pesantren fulfil educational functions aligned with constitutional goals, including the enhancement of faith, piety, noble character, and the mastery of science and technology.
Consequently, the Majelis Masyayikh believes there is no constitutional reason to place pesantren outside the scope of state funding responsibilities. The group explained that the original construction during the law’s drafting intended for the state to be mandatory in funding pesantren. However, due to the budgeting schemes at the time relying on grant mechanisms, the formulation ‘assisting the funding of pesantren operations’ was adopted.
The Majelis Masyayikh views this phrasing as a technical compromise within the fiscal system rather than an ideological or constitutional choice. ‘The state remains obligated to fund pesantren education as mandated by the construction of Article 31 of the 1945 Constitution; thus, the phrase ’assisting the funding of pesantren operations’ deviates from the constitutional mandate,’ said Abdul Ghofarrozin.
Furthermore, the Majelis Masyayikh noted that the phrase creates legal uncertainty in practice. Many local governments, according to the institution, interpret pesantren funding as an optional policy. As a result, budget support for pesantren is often provided through irregular grant schemes based on proposals, depending on regional fiscal capacity, or is even not allocated in the Regional Budget (APBD). Such conditions potentially lead to unequal treatment of students (santri) as citizens, despite Article 28D paragraph (1) and Article 28I paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution guaranteeing fair legal certainty and protection from discriminatory treatment.
The Majelis Masyayikh emphasised that the recognition of the community’s role in funding pesantren should not be interpreted as a relinquishment of state responsibility. The institution maintains that community participation and state obligation should be viewed as two complementary instruments, rather than substitutes for one another. The Majelis Masyayikh hopes the Constitutional Court will interpret Article 48 of the Pesantren Law in accordance with the spirit of the 1945 Constitution, positioning the state as the primary person responsible for national education, including education organised by pesantren.