The Prague Post Online: Opinion: Motivation for integration

November 22nd, 2008

Endowment Fund Business Listings ONLINE Reservations Classifieds Subscriptions

Motivation for integration

European Court rules that Czech education system fails Romany pupils
Commentary | Search restaurants | Archives

November 21st, 2007 issue

By Bill Cohn

On Nov. 13, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, ruled that the Czech Education Ministry created a system of de facto segregation by systematically placing Romany, or Gypsy, pupils in separate schools.

Judges said the Czech Republic violated the European Convention on Human Rights Article 14, prohibiting discrimination, and Article 2 of Protocol 1, guaranteeing the right to education.

By 13 votes to 4, the court ruled for the plaintiffs in D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic. The case was brought on behalf of 18 Czech nationals of Romany origin. The judges were persuaded by the European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance, finding that the channeling of Romany children to remedial schools was “quasi-automatic” as the psychological tests used for such placements were culturally biased.

The commission concluded that the testing was not fair, that the true abilities of each child were not properly evaluated, and that Romany children were frequently placed in special schools “without any adequate psychological or pedagogical assessment, the real criteria clearly being their national origin.”

Judges awarded the 18 plaintiffs 4,000 euros ($5,880/106,800 Kč) each as damages and 10,000 euros jointly in costs and expenses. The financial penalty stick was indeed light, but it will likely be outweighed by the carrot of European Union funds.

On Nov. 15, an EU spokeswoman told reporters that the Czechs could benefit from aid to help end discrimination against Romany children. The ruling has been widely praised, and rightly so. A Czech government spokeswoman stated that the Czech Republic welcomes and will comply with the decision.

Let us hope that the education minister promptly follows up in applying for EU funds, because those resources will be sorely needed to meet human rights convention standards. Lofty constitutional principles are, of course, more easily espoused than realized. The hard work will now begin.

This ruling affirms important principles of constitutional law: People should be treated as individuals, not merely members of a group (“The court has made clear that racial discrimination has no place in 21st-century Europe,” James A. Goldston, executive director of the Open Society Justice Initiative told euobserver.com), minorities need protections from the “tyranny of the majority” as Tocqueville and Mill wrote (the European Court noted that, as a result of their turbulent history and constant uprooting, the Roma had become a disadvantaged and vulnerable minority that therefore required special protection), and that the right to a meaningful and appropriate public education is vital to youngsters.

While the law establishes standards, it must also constantly balance competing rights and interests. As a former teacher in the New York City public high schools and an attorney advocate for the families of children with special needs in California public schools, I am well aware of the trade-offs involved in meeting the special needs of challenged pupils and meeting the needs of mainstream students — all with limited resources. Yes, we would like to provide the best possible education to children with special needs, but at what cost?

My son voiced a typical response to this decision: “It’s their own fault.”

He goes to a Czech public school and has seen Romany classmates drift away from classes. Many Czechs maintain that the Roma culture simply discounts the importance of education. Indeed, Roma culture poses challenges, fueling anti-Roma prejudice throughout Europe.

Amnesty International released a Nov. 15 report highlighting discrimination against Romany pupils in Slovakia. And, this month, prompted by public anger over the murder of an Italian woman, allegedly by a Romanian Romany immigrant, Italy’s government adopted emergency legislation allowing the swift deportation of immigrants accused of committing crimes.

This new law is being used to expel immigrants without any trial or any proof that the alleged dangerous person has broken the law. The law is seemingly at odds with European law, which allows EU citizens to travel freely across member states’ borders. Critics contend that it is a racist law that will encourage xenophobic attitudes in Italy, where some half a million Romanians live, and elsewhere in Europe.

Obviously, meeting the standards set forth in the Nov. 13 European Court of Human Rights ruling presents a great challenge. The court noted that the Czech Republic is not alone in its difficulties in providing schooling for Romany children. Significantly, this case was the first challenge at the European level to the practice of educational discrimination — widespread throughout Central and Southeast Europe — in which Romany children are routinely placed in remedial schools regardless of their intellectual abilities.

To the extent that pupils rise (or fall) to the level of the expectations of teachers, then we must honor this ruling by expecting pupils to succeed, no matter what the obstacles. We must treat youngsters as individuals, with the capacity to realize their own unique potential — because that is the right thing to do. And, as a Czech lawyer noted to me, it makes public policy sense because the cost of fully educating youngsters with special needs is less than the costs they place upon society as disenfranchised adults likely to be unemployed, unhealthy, criminal or drug-addicted.

In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. the Board of Education that public schools must be integrated because racially segregated schools are necessarily unequal, for reasons including disparate tax revenues and other resources and the psychological stigma of segregation. The court directed that integration must proceed “with all deliberate speed” — an obviously vague standard for enforcing the ruling. As southern segregationists organized resistance, the federal government used sticks, like sending troops to Little Rock, and carrots, like federal funding, to gain compliance. It is of course still a work in progress more than half a century later. Yet, there is no doubt that the country is better and more just, thanks to that landmark ruling.

In 1975, the Supreme Court recognized the vital importance of public education by ruling in Goss v. Lopez that, for every child, a free and appropriate education is a protected liberty interest within the meaning of the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which applies the Bill of Rights to the 50 states, providing individuals’ protection against arbitrary or discriminatory state action. My colleague and mentor Peter Roos, the lawyer who argued Goss before the Supreme Court, went on to start META (Multicultural Education, Training and Advocacy), a nonprofit advocacy group, to help breathe life into that ruling. META and other public-interest law firms have been addressing Roma education rights in Central Europe for the better part of a decade.

Despite the many obstacles on the path to equality of educational opportunity for all children, the Nov. 13 European Court ruling should serve as an important milestone in the legal and social development of Europe. The Czech Republic should do all in its power to be a catalyst toward that goal.

— The author is a lawyer, writer and lecturer at the University of New York in Prague, and is a frequent contributor to The Prague Post.

Be the first to add a comment!

Most e-mailed articles
The joys of heartbreak Standoff Sarkozy chides radar base

Related articles
The joys of heartbreak

Most visited in Business Listings

The Prague Post Online contains a selection of articles that have been printed in
The Prague Post, a weekly newspaper published in the Czech Republic.
To subscribe to the print paper, click here.
Unauthorized reproduction is strictly prohibited.