Page 78 - 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. 78
šolsko polje, letnik xxxi, številka 3–4
facilities for State or private schools; and c) in accordance with the right to
freedom of education, Member States shall be required to provide the fi-
nancial means whereby this right can be exercised in practice and to make
the necessary public grants to enable schools to carry out their tasks and
fulfil their duties under the same conditions as in corresponding State
establishments.13
However, this Resolution is not legally binding, which is clearly seen
from the arbitrations by the European Commission and the Court for
Human Rights regarding the section of the Resolution regarding the obli-
gation of the state to provide the financial means for private schools. This
is an official explanation of article 2 of the Protocol to the Convention
for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which
states, ‘No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of
any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching,
the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and
teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical con-
victions.’ (Digest, 1985, p. 743) In a few cases related to the quoted article,
both the European Commission and the Court for Human Rights un-
doubtedly decided that the Protocol doesn’t impose on the state the obli-
gation to introduce and subsidise any kind of education at any level, nor
that no parent or group of parents cannot put pressure on the state to es-
tablish new special schools or subsidise existing schools, if they educate in
accordance with special cultural, religious or denominational tradition or
particular academic specialisation. (Meredith, 1992, p. 26)
It follows that Slovenia realizes the demands of the Convention re-
lated to the possibility of establishing private schools. However, it is worth
recalling that these demands are set negatively in the Convention, as an
injunction on the prohibition for establishing private schools; and that
the Convention as-a-whole conveys another idea, namely that children
too, not only parents, should have a say on which school (public or pri-
vate) they shall attend.
Last, but not least; the right of children in private schools in Slovenia
has been determined by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of
Slovenia more than once. The Constitutional Court has not changed the
fundamentals of the established arrangement for private education, but
it has decided that the state needs to finance private primary schools to
the same extent as it finances public primary schools (for the compulso-
ry part of the curriculum). It based its decision on the specific interpreta-
tion of the Slovenian Constitution and did not refer to the international
13 »Parlamento Europeo: La libertà di scuola e di istruzione« (1984), in Pajer, 1991.
76
facilities for State or private schools; and c) in accordance with the right to
freedom of education, Member States shall be required to provide the fi-
nancial means whereby this right can be exercised in practice and to make
the necessary public grants to enable schools to carry out their tasks and
fulfil their duties under the same conditions as in corresponding State
establishments.13
However, this Resolution is not legally binding, which is clearly seen
from the arbitrations by the European Commission and the Court for
Human Rights regarding the section of the Resolution regarding the obli-
gation of the state to provide the financial means for private schools. This
is an official explanation of article 2 of the Protocol to the Convention
for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which
states, ‘No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of
any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching,
the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and
teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical con-
victions.’ (Digest, 1985, p. 743) In a few cases related to the quoted article,
both the European Commission and the Court for Human Rights un-
doubtedly decided that the Protocol doesn’t impose on the state the obli-
gation to introduce and subsidise any kind of education at any level, nor
that no parent or group of parents cannot put pressure on the state to es-
tablish new special schools or subsidise existing schools, if they educate in
accordance with special cultural, religious or denominational tradition or
particular academic specialisation. (Meredith, 1992, p. 26)
It follows that Slovenia realizes the demands of the Convention re-
lated to the possibility of establishing private schools. However, it is worth
recalling that these demands are set negatively in the Convention, as an
injunction on the prohibition for establishing private schools; and that
the Convention as-a-whole conveys another idea, namely that children
too, not only parents, should have a say on which school (public or pri-
vate) they shall attend.
Last, but not least; the right of children in private schools in Slovenia
has been determined by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of
Slovenia more than once. The Constitutional Court has not changed the
fundamentals of the established arrangement for private education, but
it has decided that the state needs to finance private primary schools to
the same extent as it finances public primary schools (for the compulso-
ry part of the curriculum). It based its decision on the specific interpreta-
tion of the Slovenian Constitution and did not refer to the international
13 »Parlamento Europeo: La libertà di scuola e di istruzione« (1984), in Pajer, 1991.
76
