Thrissur School Owner’s ‘Go to Pakistan’ Remark Draws Protest

A school owner in Kerala’s Thrissur district is facing protests after reportedly telling students who missed an Independence Day programme to “go to Pakistan.” The remark was communicated in a message to students or parents, according to multiple reports published on Sunday, and was accompanied by a warning of action over absence from the event.

The precise wording, context and school attendance rule should be examined by the education department. The core issue is already clear: a disagreement about participation in a school function does not justify language that questions a child’s nationality or belonging.

## Attendance can be enforced without humiliation

Schools may require students to attend notified events and may ask families to explain an absence. They can mark attendance, follow published disciplinary procedures and consider illness, transport or family circumstances. None of those powers authorises a manager to attach a communal or national slur to an absent child.

Independence Day activities are meant to develop civic understanding. Turning them into a loyalty test defeats that purpose. A student can miss a ceremony for many reasons, and even an unexplained absence should be addressed proportionately.

The management should preserve the original message and provide it to the competent authority. Deleted posts, edited clips and second-hand transcripts can produce confusion. Investigators should verify who sent it, who received it and whether any threatened penalty was imposed.

## What parents and students are entitled to know

Families protesting the remark have a right to a timely response that does more than express regret for “hurt caused.” The school should state whether the message reflected an authorised policy, withdraw any collective threat and explain how it will prevent retaliation against students who complained.

The district education office should identify the school’s recognition and management category, the rules governing disciplinary action and the officer responsible for the inquiry. If statements are taken from minors, they should be recorded privately and without requiring children to repeat humiliating language in public.

Teachers and staff who were not responsible should not be treated as targets of anger. A peaceful protest can demand accountability while allowing classes and examinations to continue. Political organisations joining the dispute should avoid displaying children as evidence or using their identities in campaign material.

## Citizenship is not a classroom weapon

“Go to Pakistan” has a history as a taunt directed at Indian Muslims and critics. Used by a school authority, it carries a power imbalance: the person speaking may influence attendance records, discipline and a child’s daily environment. That makes a clear institutional response essential.

Schools should have codes that prohibit discriminatory remarks by staff and managers, with a complaint route outside the immediate chain of command. Civic education should teach that constitutional belonging is not granted or withdrawn by a principal, owner or teacher.

The department’s eventual finding must distinguish verified fact from allegation, but it should not minimise the educational harm because the words appeared in a message rather than a classroom. Digital communication from school management is an official extension of the institution.

The appropriate resolution is not compulsory patriotic performance. It is a school where attendance rules are transparent, grievances are heard and no child is told that absence from one event makes them less Indian. The inquiry should be prompt, written and focused on the safety and dignity of students.