165/1965 Coll.



FIND



The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic



On behalf of the United States



The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic decided on 13 June. June 1995 in plenary on

the proposal of the Group of 30 members of Parliament of the United

Republic for annulment of the Government Regulation No. 15/1994 Coll., on the free

the provision of textbooks, curricula, texts and basic school supplies,



as follows:



The proposal is rejected.



Justification



(I).



On 4 April 2006. 11. in 1994, the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic received a proposal from a group of 30

members of the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the United Kingdom to begin

proceedings for cancellation of Government Regulation No. 15/1994 Coll., on the free

the provision of textbooks, curricula, texts and basic school supplies. According to the

the opinion of the appellants is that regulation of the Government in breach of article. 33 para.

2 of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms, with article 28 para. 2 (a). and), (b)), and

article. 41 of the Convention on the rights of the child and with article 5 (3). 2 International

Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights.



The proposal is accompanied by three signing of the Charter. The first two contain

the signatures of 30 members and they are heading a group of deputies of the Czech Parliament

proposing the cancellation of Government Regulation No. 15/1994 Coll., on the free

the provision of textbooks, curricula, texts and basic school supplies, and

correspond with Petite application. The third signature Charter

containing the signatures of the 11 members of the Group of members of Parliament is entitled

The CZECH REPUBLIC proposing repeal of section 17(2). 2 and part of section 18 of Act No. 424/1991 Coll.

(while it is a Decree No 425/1991 Coll. of the Ministry of labour and social

Affairs, on the remuneration of work performed outside an employment relationship, which was

repealed by Act No. 74/1994 Coll., amending and supplementing the labour code

No. 65/1965 Coll., as amended, and certain other laws),

on cancellation of the § 3 para. 4 Act No. 166/1993 Coll. on the Supreme Audit

the Office, all as amended by Act No. 116/1994 Coll., which amends and supplements the

Act No. 424/1991 Coll. on Association in political parties and in

political movements, as amended, Act No. 99/1963

Coll., the civil procedure code, as amended, supplementing Act

No 166/1993 Coll. on the Supreme Audit Office, as amended by law no 331/

/1993 Coll., and Act No. 328/1991 Coll., on bankruptcy and settlement, as amended by

Act No. 122/1993 Coll., and amending Act No. 563/1991 Coll., on accounting.

Refers to abandoned other legislation than that are infected

the design. From the above it is clear that the proposal for a group of MPs is to

Government Regulation No. 15/1994 Coll., and this proposal is brought by a group of 30

the members referred to in the first two signing papers.



According to § 64 para. 2 (a). b) Act No. 182/1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court,

is the proposal to abolish any law or its individual

the provisions referred to in article. 87 para. 1 (b). (b)) of the Constitution of the Czech Republic

entitled to submit, inter alia, at least 25 members of the group or group

at least 10 senators. The number of 30 members is therefore sufficient to give

the relevant application for annulment of a regulation of the Government. In the design group

members stated that the Government issued Regulation No. 15/1994 Coll. after

the amendment to the original provisions of § 4 para. 1 the Education Act article I

Act No. 194/1993 Coll., which set aside the finding of the Constitutional Court No.

49/1994 Coll. On Group members quoting the contested regulation the Government and

claims that it is in violation of:



-with the provisions of article 8(1). 33 para. 2 of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms, which

all citizens guarantees the right to free education in elementary and

high schools,



-with the provisions of article 8(1). 28 para. 2 (a). a), b) of the Convention on the rights of the child,

the renowned under no. 104/1991 Coll., according to which the Czech Republic as

the party has pledged to introduce free school for all children

education and to introduce free secondary education and vocational education and

In addition, where necessary, to provide financial support,



-with the provisions of article 8(1). 41 of the Convention on the rights of the child and article. 5 (3). 2

The International Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights,

According to which, in the case of a conflict of national and international law applies

the law, which was on the day of entry into force of an international treaty for persons

subject to the jurisdiction of the Contracting State more favourable.



Resolution of the Government of the United Kingdom # 671 from day 1. 12.1993 shows that the

in point (I). the Government adopts a regulation of the Government concerning the free provision of

textbooks, curricula, texts and basic school supplies with modifications by

the opinion of the President of the Legislative Council of the Government and of the Government. In point

II. the said resolution of the Government imposes to the Minister of education, youth and

sports to develop a final version of the Government Decree referred to in section I.

of this resolution and to submit it to the Prime Minister for signature. By resolution of the

the Government of 5. 1.1994 no. 13 was determined the effectiveness of the regulation of the Government of the day

publication. Government Regulation No. 15/1994 Coll. of 1 July. 12.1993

posted in amount of 5/1994 Coll., which was sent out on 25. 1. the 1994 and

signed by the Prime Minister and the Minister of education, youth and sports.

It is therefore a condition of admissibility of the application within the meaning of the provisions of § 66

paragraph. 1 Act No. 182/1993 Coll. and it can be assumed that the regulation of the Government

It was taken in the manner specified in § 68 para. 2 Act No. 182/1993 Coll.



Non-government, which Constitutional Court received 27 September. 12.1994, said

the opinion on the draft group members adopted at its meeting held

on 21 February 2006. 12.1994, and stated that its Regulation No. 15/1994 Coll. is based on

the mandate of her provisions of section 4, paragraph 4. 2 of the Act No. 29/1984 Coll., on

the system of primary and secondary education (the Education Act), under which the Government

the extent to which students provide free textbooks, instructional

texts and basic school supplies. She added that education in bezplatností

the meaning of the provisions of article. 33 para. 2 of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms

means (in connection with the said section 4 of the Education Act) entitled the pupil on the

security of the corresponding structures, the wages of the skilled

teachers and other personnel, operating and maintenance costs of buildings,

free use of school supplies, that is, those that own the school and

that uses for its own teaching (models, chemicals, chalks, wall

maps and images, etc.). School supplies that are in use and

ownership of the pupil, is paid by the student or his parents, with the exception of the needs

provided by the State to pupils in the first year of primary school to the extent

$200 per student. The said Decree-Law provides that even textbooks on

primary school pupils are often borrowed for free, but not their

the property. In secondary schools pupils are buying textbooks and become

their owners. This fact is not contrary to the Charter of fundamental rights

and freedoms, as the Government only has implemented its mandate, moreover, it is quite

difficult, especially on secondary vocational schools, precisely defined (without

bound to a list of books) the concept of "textbook", because it is used in the

in many cases, literature that does not have the character of a didactically

text, and it's normally be the pupils to their ownership.

Furthermore, the Government points out that article. 28 para. 2 of the Convention on the rights of the child

does not contain the letter a), (b)) and does not affect the contested regulation

the Government, since it states that are party to the agreement,

undertake to "do all the necessary measures to ensure that discipline in school

was provided in a manner consistent with the child's human dignity ... ".

Article. 28 para. 1 (b). and the Convention on the rights of the child), which was probably

Here, it is not contrary to the contested regulation of the Government No. 15/1994 Coll.

because it is about the free and compulsory primary education, as well

as well as the provisions of article. 28 para. 1 (b). (b) the Convention on the rights of the child), which

provides that the States that are party to the agreement, "encourage the development of

different forms of secondary education, including General and vocational

education, makes it is acceptable and accessible to every child, and take

appropriate measures such as the introduction of free education, and in

If necessary, the provision of financial support ". Even this provision

is not contrary to the contested regulation. The appeal of the article. 41 of the Convention on

rights of the child, which is contained in the text of the proposal is considered by the Government

irrelevant, since it states that "nothing in this Convention shall not affect the

the provision, which more fully contribute to the implementation of the rights of the child and

that may be contained in:



and the legal order of the State), which is a Contracting Party, or



(b)), which is the international law for such a State. "



Finally, article. 5 (3). 2 of the International Covenant on economic, social and

cultural rights, in which the members of the alleged abuses in the design

They point out, it affects only the universal human rights. The Government considers

that the free provision of textbooks and teaching needs may be interpreted

as a basic human right.



In the present case, the Constitutional Court requested the opinion of the Ministry and

education, youth and sports. Received is on 21. 4. the 1995 and this

the opinion is identical with the opinion of the Government.



From the journal of the Ministry of education, youth and sports No. 6 and 7 of the

July and August 1994 suggests that the list of approved and issued textbooks


for primary schools (valid in the school year 1994/1995), borrowed in

the Government Decree No. 15/1994 Coll. of the pupils of primary schools free of charge,

contains more than 650 titles.



II.



In terms of legislation, which members of the group in its proposal

speak right at the outset, it must be pointed out that Act No. 29/1984 Coll., on

the system of primary and secondary education (the Education Act), section 4, paragraph 4. 1

provides that in schools that are part of the system of basic and

secondary schools, citizens have the right to free education. In private and

religious schools can ensure the right to education for consideration. In §

4 (4). 2 of the Act states that, to the extent provided by the Government of the

students provide free textbooks, textbooks and elementary school

needs.



Members of the group design is based on the fact that Government Regulation No. 15/1994

Coll. on the provision of free textbooks, curricula, texts and basic

school supplies, is in breach of article. 33 para. 2 of the Charter of fundamental rights

and freedoms, with art. 28 para. 2 (a). a), b) of the Convention on the rights of the child, article. 5

paragraph. 2 of the International Covenant on economic, social and cultural

rights. The Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms in his article. 33 para. 2

provides that citizens have the right to free education in elementary and

secondary schools, according to the abilities of the citizen and the possibility of companies also

at universities. Article. 28 of the Convention on the rights of the child published under no.

104/1991 Coll., which does not contain the letters and in paragraph 2), and (b)), provides

that "States parties shall take all measures

necessary to ensure that discipline in schools was ensured by the way

manner consistent with the child's human dignity and in accordance with this Convention ".

From the context of application, however, can be inferred that the group members had

apparently the article in mind. 28 para. 1 (b). a), b) of the Convention on the rights of the child,

which provides that "the States that are party to the Convention,

right of the child to education and with a view to the progressive implementation of the

rights and on the basis of equal opportunities, in particular:



and all children are introduced) free and compulsory primary education;



(b) encourage the development of different forms of) secondary education, including

General and vocational education, makes them acceptable and available for each

child and take other appropriate measures such as the introduction of

free education and, if necessary, the provision of financial

support; ".



Article. 5 (3). 2 of the International Covenant on economic, social and

cultural rights, published under no. 120/1976 Coll. lays down that "no

limitation or derogation from any of the fundamental human rights

recognized or existing in any country on the basis of law, conventions,

regulations or practices will not be admitted on the pretext that such a Pact

the law does not recognize or that is recognized to a lesser extent ".



In this context, to be again noted that Act No. 29/1984 Coll., section 4

paragraph. 1 provides that in schools that are part of the system of basic

and secondary schools, citizens have the right to free education. In private

and religious schools can ensure the right to education for consideration.

The finding of the Constitutional Court No. 49/1994 Coll., on which members of the group design

points out, in section 4, paragraph 4. 1 of Act No. 29/1984 Coll., only part of the

sounding "unless otherwise provided by the law". Other parts of the Act

touched, not even the provisions of § 4 para. 2, which provides that, to the extent

established by the Government to provide free textbooks to pupils, textbooks and

basic school supplies.



The legal standards lower legal force must be in accordance with the law

greater legal force. On the basis of the generally recognized principle, as follows

It means that the Government must comply not only with the constitutional

law, but also international treaties under article. 10 of the Constitution and "ordinary

the laws ". In all legal standards of higher legal force (in relation to the

Government Regulation No. 15/1994 Coll.) the guarantees the right to free education.

The said Government Regulation No. 15/1994 Coll., the right to free education

It does not limit, and basically any prejudice. The royalty-free education

no doubt means that the State shall bear the costs for the establishment of schools and school

the devices on their operation and maintenance, primarily, however, does not require so-called.

Therefore, the provision of tuition fees, education at the primary and secondary level for

consideration. The exception may be the private school and Church existing next to the

the network of schools of the "State", which provide the right to a sufficient degree to

education free of charge. Determination of the extent of the free provision of textbooks,

teaching texts and basic school supplies to the Government cannot be accommodated under the

the concept of the right to free education. According to the interpretation of the concepts of the right to

free education, that the appellants have submitted, the State should ensure

free provision of all that school attendance at primary and

high school connected, e.g.. facilities, slippers,

Briefcase, the finance charge memo, stationery, exercise herself, etc. It is clear,

It required that education cannot rest in the fact that the State bear all

costs that citizens in connection with the realization of the right to education

they are incurred. The State may recover part of the costs in connection with

the realization of the right to education, and the Government has to do without a doubt

permissions. In any case, it does not question the principles of the free

education at the primary and secondary schools.



Article. in article 13(3). 1 of the International Covenant on economic, social and

cultural rights provides that States parties shall recognise the Pact

the right of everyone to education, article. in article 13(3). 2 of the same Covenant provides that

States, Contracting Parties to the Covenant recognize that, with a view to achieving

the full realization of this right:



and basic education will be mandatory) and freely accessible to all,



(b) secondary education will be universally) allowed to and made available for

all by all appropriate means, and in particular, the gradual introduction of

free education.



Costs associated with the implementation of the right to education can be divided between

the State and the citizen, or his legal representative. It must be recalled that the

It is also in the interest of the citizen to education itself (and thus the higher qualification

and a better ability to enforce on the labour market) has reached and to achieving

He himself aspired to. The costs associated with the implementation of the right to education are

long-term investment into the life of the citizen. State shall bear a substantial part of

These costs, however, it is his duty to carry them all.



The Constitutional Court has come to the conclusion that Government Regulation No. 15/1994 Coll., on

the provision of free textbooks, curricula, texts and primary school

needs, altering or article. 33 para. 2 of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms,

article. 28 para. 1 (b). a) and b), and article. 41 of the Convention on the rights of the child and article. 5

paragraph. 2 of the International Covenant on economic, social and cultural

rights and other constitutional laws, or the laws or international treaties

According to the article. 10 of the Constitution, and therefore the proposal from a group of MPs at the cancel this

the legislation referred to in section 70 para. 2 Act No. 182/1993 Coll., on the constitutional

the Court rejected.



The President of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic:



in the z.. Haboob in r.



Vice Chairman