Page 39 - Šolsko polje, XXXI, 2020, 3-4: Convention on the Rights of the Child: Educational Opportunities and Social Justice, eds. Zdenko Kodelja and Urška Štremfel
P. 39
s. kraljić ■ implementation and protection of the child’s right to education
The ECtHR has in many cases addressed the difficulties relating to
the education of Roma children. Namely, Roma people’s educational level
is below the general educational level of other segments of the population
(Kraljić, 2019b). The Roma are today a specific disadvantaged and vulner-
able minority, with their vulnerability meaning that a difference in treat-
ment to correct the lack of equality may be required in particular circum-
stances. In the case Sampanis and Others v. Greece (para. 85), the ECtHR
stressed the competent authorities should facilitate Roma children’s en-
rolment in school, even if certain required administrative documents
were missing. Activities of this nature could contribute to high literacy
rates of Roma children, reduce the drop-out school rate, lower the share
of students who complete just primary education, and increase the school
attendance of Roma children (Kraljić, 2019b). On the other hand, homo-
geneous departments containing only Roma children have been described
by the ECtHR (D. H. and Others v. Czech Republic, Sampanis and Others
v. Greece, Oršuš and Others v. Croatia) as segrementary and discriminato-
ry. Arranging the education curriculum for Roma children must ensure
safeguards for their special needs. The decision must be transparent and
based on clearly defined criteria, not simply ethnic origin. Such measures
cannot be considered reasonable and proportionate if they would lead to
an education that brings the problems of Roma children together and
jeopardises their further personal development, instead of tackling their
real problems or helping them integrate into ordinary schools and develop
skills that would facilitate life among the majority population (D.H. and
Others v. the Czech Republic, para. 207).
Following the analysed decisions of ECtHR, there is no doubt that
the child’s right to education is recognised and respected as a fundamen-
tal right and holds immense importance for children in their childhood
and adulthood. The right to education can be subjected to limitations,
but they must be objective, proportional and not violate other children’s
rights. States must ensure, through their authorities, that the laws and
measures deriving from them respect and enable realisation of the child’s
right to education.
The COVID-19 crisis and the child’s right to education
Classroom-centred learning is nowadays challenged by the expansion of
access to knowledge and the emergence of learning spaces beyond the tra-
ditional classroom (UNESCO, 2015b, p. 49). We are living in a time of
the fourth industrial revolution, a new era that builds and expands the
impact of digitalisation in novel and unanticipated dimensions. Its tech-
nologies are already changing all areas of our day-to-day lives as well as
37
The ECtHR has in many cases addressed the difficulties relating to
the education of Roma children. Namely, Roma people’s educational level
is below the general educational level of other segments of the population
(Kraljić, 2019b). The Roma are today a specific disadvantaged and vulner-
able minority, with their vulnerability meaning that a difference in treat-
ment to correct the lack of equality may be required in particular circum-
stances. In the case Sampanis and Others v. Greece (para. 85), the ECtHR
stressed the competent authorities should facilitate Roma children’s en-
rolment in school, even if certain required administrative documents
were missing. Activities of this nature could contribute to high literacy
rates of Roma children, reduce the drop-out school rate, lower the share
of students who complete just primary education, and increase the school
attendance of Roma children (Kraljić, 2019b). On the other hand, homo-
geneous departments containing only Roma children have been described
by the ECtHR (D. H. and Others v. Czech Republic, Sampanis and Others
v. Greece, Oršuš and Others v. Croatia) as segrementary and discriminato-
ry. Arranging the education curriculum for Roma children must ensure
safeguards for their special needs. The decision must be transparent and
based on clearly defined criteria, not simply ethnic origin. Such measures
cannot be considered reasonable and proportionate if they would lead to
an education that brings the problems of Roma children together and
jeopardises their further personal development, instead of tackling their
real problems or helping them integrate into ordinary schools and develop
skills that would facilitate life among the majority population (D.H. and
Others v. the Czech Republic, para. 207).
Following the analysed decisions of ECtHR, there is no doubt that
the child’s right to education is recognised and respected as a fundamen-
tal right and holds immense importance for children in their childhood
and adulthood. The right to education can be subjected to limitations,
but they must be objective, proportional and not violate other children’s
rights. States must ensure, through their authorities, that the laws and
measures deriving from them respect and enable realisation of the child’s
right to education.
The COVID-19 crisis and the child’s right to education
Classroom-centred learning is nowadays challenged by the expansion of
access to knowledge and the emergence of learning spaces beyond the tra-
ditional classroom (UNESCO, 2015b, p. 49). We are living in a time of
the fourth industrial revolution, a new era that builds and expands the
impact of digitalisation in novel and unanticipated dimensions. Its tech-
nologies are already changing all areas of our day-to-day lives as well as
37
