2024-07-14 06:28:51
The court concluded that the education program for the interests of minority languages and cultural history established by the state, which every student at the pre-school and primary education level can attend free of charge in the amount of three academic hours per week, adequately ensures the preservation and development of the language, culture and ethnic identity of minorities.
In October 2022, the Saeima adopted amendments to the Law on Education and the Law on General Education, which stipulate that in Latvia, also in preschools and primary education, there will be a gradual transition to teaching only in the national language within three years. Before that, classes were held only in Latvian in secondary schools.
The transition to teaching only in the Latvian language in the basic education programs of minority schools in Latvia began with the first involving the 1st, 4th and 7th grades.
From September 1, 2024, lessons will only be taught in Latvian in the 2nd, 5th and 8th grades, while from September 1, 2025 – in the 3rd, 6th and 9th grades.
The case was initiated after the application of several private individuals. They asked the ST to evaluate whether the amendments to the Law on Education and the Law on General Education comply with Articles 1 and 114 of the Constitution.
Article 1 of the Constitution states that Latvia is an independent democratic republic, but Article 114 stipulates that persons belonging to minorities have the right to preserve and develop their linguistic, ethnic and cultural identity.
The court concluded that the state has an obligation to create such an education system that, even for minority students, meets the principles of access to education, acceptability and adaptation and ensures their right to learn, preserve and develop their linguistic, ethnic and cultural identity.
In addition, the state must also take into account the individual abilities and needs of learners, including special needs, in fulfilling this obligation. The Court drew attention to the state’s freedom of action regarding what kind of educational system it creates and how it ensures the right of persons belonging to minorities to preserve and develop their linguistic, ethnic and cultural identity.
In this aspect, the court also took into account the special circumstances of Latvia, which have developed as a result of the country’s long-term occupation and Russification, and their connection with the current situation in the field of the use of the state language. The state must promote and strengthen the use of the Latvian language in Latvia in order to ensure, among other things, the rights of persons belonging to minorities as well as other people and the protection of the democratic state system. This obligation also includes promoting the use of the national language at every level of education, emphasizes ST.
Visupirms ST checked whether the way of ensuring the rights of minorities chosen by the legislator, namely the creation of an interest education program, meets the standards of the Constitution and the General Convention on the Protection of National Minorities. The court recognized that interest education is a suitable means of learning the minority language, as well as content related to minority culture and ethnic identity, both at the pre-school education level and at the elementary education level, as well as for children with special needs. Although attendance at interest education classes is voluntary, this in itself is not a circumstance that would call into question the duty of fulfilling the state’s positive obligation.
Also, the court found that the Cabinet of Ministers, fulfilling the mandate given to it by the legislator, has created a model educational program for minority language and cultural history interests and guidelines for its implementation. Educators are obliged to individualize this program and provide feedback in its implementation. Local governments, on the other hand, have a long-term obligation to ensure free access to the mentioned program for every child whose parents or legal representatives have submitted a relevant application.
The mentioned obligation can be implemented in the amount prescribed by law – three hours a week. Such a number of hours both at the pre-school education level and at the elementary education level is considered sufficient for the proper learning of the language of the minority, as well as the ethnic and cultural uniqueness, moreover, the state and local government educational institutions are not limited in expanding the educational offer of interests related to the content of minorities.
State and local government educational institutions must provide additional support for learning the national language to those learners who need it at the preschool and primary education levels. Consequently, the state has created mechanisms for ensuring and controlling the quality of general education.
On the other hand, regarding students with special needs, the Constitutional Court recognized that learning the national language reduces the risk of students with special needs being isolated from society and promotes their independence. The obligation to provide children with special needs with individualized and personalized support for the effective learning of the national language may in certain cases also include the use of the mother tongue when it corresponds to the best interests of the child.
Taking into account all of the above, the ST concluded that the state has fulfilled its positive obligation in state and local government educational institutions at the level of pre-school education and primary education to provide an educational process appropriate to the interests of persons belonging to minorities, which includes adequate opportunities to learn, preserve and develop their language, ethnic and cultural uniqueness, as well as complying with the principles of educational accessibility, acceptability and adaptability.
Therefore, the disputed norms correspond to Article 114 of the Constitution in conjunction with the first sentence of Article 112.
The contested norms entered into force more than ten months after the date of their promulgation, but for some class groups they have not even entered into force yet. The court recognized that it is possible to adequately prepare for the impact of the disputed norms in such a period. Therefore, the disputed norms correspond to the principle of protection of legal expectations established in Article 1 of the Constitution.
As reported, the State Supreme Court previously issued a verdict in another case regarding the norms that determine the acquisition of education in private educational institutions only in the state language, with which the transition to studies only in the state language in private educational institutions was recognized as consistent with the Constitution.
At the end of 2023, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) announced that it had not found a violation of human rights in the transition to education in the national language implemented in Latvia. In the judgments of the ECtHR Chamber in the case “Djibouti and others v. Latvia” and in the case “Valiullina and others v. Latvia” unanimously recognized that there was no violation of the European Convention on Human Rights.
In the case “Valiullina and others v. Latvia”, the complainants expressed concern about the amendments to the 2018 law, which increased the number of subjects that had to be taught in Latvian – the state language – in public schools, as a result of which the teaching time in Russian decreased. In 2019, the Constitutional Court decided on the constitutionality of the relevant amendments, recognizing them as conforming to the constitution.
The submitters expressed concern about the same changes in private schools. Also in this case, the Constitutional Court recognized in 2020 that the legislator, by regulating the use of languages in general education in private schools, has ensured a balance between both the promotion of the use of the national language and the right of persons belonging to minorities to preserve and develop their identity and culture.
The ECtHR found that the measures taken by the Latvian government to increase the use of the national language in schools were proportionate and necessary, in particular, to ensure unity in the education system and a sufficient level of knowledge of the Latvian language, which would allow the population to participate effectively in public life.
2024-07-14 06:28:51