Convention concernant la lutte contre la discrimination dans le domaine de l'enseignement

Cette Convention a pour objet non seulement la lutte contre la discrimination dans le domaine de l'enseignement, mais aussi l'adoption de mesures visant à promouvoir l'égalité de chances et de traitement dans ce domaine. Elle s'inspire donc de deux principes fondamentaux distincts, qui figurent aussi bien dans l'Acte constitutif de l'Organisation que dans la Déclaration universelle des droits de l'homme dont les articles Z et 26 proscrivent toute forme de discrimination et visent à promouvoir le droit a l'éducation pour tous.

Society for Unaided Private Schools v India (Supreme Court of India; 2012)

In this decision, the Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutionality of section 12 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act (RTE Act), which requires all schools, both state-funded and private, to accept 25% intake of children from disadvantaged groups. However, the Court held that the RTE Act could not require private, minority schools to satisfy a 25% quota, as this would constitute a violation of the right of minority groups to establish private schools under the Indian Constitution.

Environmental & Consumer Protection Foundation v Delhi (Supreme Court of India; 2012)

In response to a petition filed by an Indian charity, the Supreme Court of India directed the governments of all States and Union Territories to ensure that all schools, whether private or state-run, provide proper toilet facilities, drinking water, sufficient classrooms and capable teaching staff. The court held that, under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act (2009) and the Indian Constitution, central, state and local governments have an obligation to ensure that all schools, both public and private, have adequate infrastructure.

Mohini Jain v Karnataka (Supreme Court of India; 1992)

In this case, a resident of Uttar Pradesh state challenged a notification issued by the Karnataka government that permitted private medical colleges to charge higher fees to students who were not allocated 'government seats'. The Supreme Court of India held that the charging of a ‘capitation fee’ by the private educational institutions violated the right to education, as implied from the right to life and human dignity, and the right to equal protection of the law.

Pages