London, 6 June 2008
On 5 June 2008, the European Court of Human Rights handed down the judgment in the case of Sampanis and Others v. Greece (application no. 32526/05). Represented by the Greek Helsinki Monitor, 11 Greek nationals of Roma origin claimed discrimination in violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) in conjunction with Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (right to education) and of Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) in respect of the treatment of their children by the educational authorities in Aspropyrgos, Greece.
The applicants were refused permission to enrol their children in local primary schools on 21 September 2004, which meant their children missed the school year 2004 - 2005. Subsequently, from the first day of school for the year 2005 – 2006, the applicants’ children faced protests, requiring police intervention, from parents of the non-Roma children who blockaded the school. From 31 October 2005, the local educational authorities placed the Roma children in an annexe building, located five kilometres from the primary school, especially established for the Roma children to prepare them for integration into the primary school.
Finding a violation of Article 14 in conjunction with Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 and of Article 13, the Court applied the jurisprudence established in D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic, at a number of points in the judgment – for example, in regards to the presumption of discrimination and the principle that a prima facie case of discrimination is capable of triggering a shift of the burden of proof.
The Court opined that the competent authorities had not adopted a single, clear criterion in choosing which children to place in the preparatory classes. Furthermore, the Government had not shown that any suitable tests were ever given to the children concerned in order to assess their capacities or potential learning difficulties.
The judgment confirmed the Court’s position that the state duty, under Article 2 of Protocol 1, to provide equal access to education, includes an obligation to adequately assess the learning needs of all children, including children belonging to disadvantaged ethnic minority communities. This judgement also confirms that discriminatory treatment of Roma children, namely their educational segregation on the basis of assumed learning needs, is a pernicious phenomenon that cannot be tolerated.
This judgment is an important step which strengthens Article 14 jurisprudence established in D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic. The judgment represents another victory for combating discriminatory educational practices and affirms the equal rights of all to receive an education on an equal basis with others.
To see the ERT case summary, click here.