Part of a law which allowed the Colombian government to charge for primary education was deemed unconstitutional after a pair of Colombian lawyers, collaborating with the law faculty at New York’s Cornell University and a coalition of civil society organisations, brought a direct challenge against its discriminatory provisions.
This guide is part of the series of Guides on the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms published by the European Court of Human Rights to inform legal practitioners about the fundamental judgments delivered by the Strasbourg Court. This particular guide analyses and sums up the case-law under Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 as at June 2015 or when subsequently updated.
Lawsuits challenging state methods of funding public schools have been launched in 45 of the 50 states over the past 40 years, and in recent years they have been extraordinarily successful.
On Tuesday 2 December 2015 a full bench of the Supreme Court of Appeal delivered a beautiful, globally significant judgment. In essence it said that the Department of Basic Education’s (DBE) failure to provide learners in Limpopo with their textbooks directly infringed on their rights to basic education, equality and dignity and amounted to unfair discrimination. The DBE’s appeal in the Limpopo textbooks saga was therefore dismissed and Basic Education For All’s (BEFA) cross appeal was upheld.
I have worked for years in an NGO using strategic litigation as a tool to protect women’s rights and I strongly believe that strategic litigation is a key tool for protecting Roma rights, too.