He High Court of Justice of Navarre (TSJN) cancelled three articles of a provincial decree on Education relating to the regulation of the types of school days in the second cycle of Early childhood, primary and special education considering that these precepts gave to families a right of veto in the schedule change request process.
In the judgment, which is subject only to appeal in cassation before the judicial authority itself, the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the TSJN partially upholds the appeal filed by the STEILAS union and declares the nullity of Articles 12.7, 13 and 14.1, considering that decision-making power of families provided for by the Foral Ordinance 106/2023 violates higher standardssuch as the LOE, more precisely article 47.2 of Law 39/2015.
The contested regional decree, the magistrates explain, deprives of any decision-making capacity -and even debate or deliberation- on the question to the teachers and the rest of the School Council if 3/5 of the favorable votes of the families are not previously reached.
They point out that Article 12.7 contested constitutes a kind of family veto to the continuation of the procedure and the possible vote on the final decision at the School Council. This decision-making power is opposed, they add, to “the purely consultative nature granted to the vote of the Senate” (Article 13 also contested).
“Article 14.1 simply reaffirms the need for families to vote in accordance for the continuation of the process; It is not so much a question, as the last article says, of collecting ‘the feelings’ of the families, but rather of collecting their express consent as a sine qua non condition, also in a not insignificant percentage”, indicate the judges.
Thus, according to the Court, even if the The school board continues to retain its authority for final approvalstated that the jurisdiction “becomes non-existent in the event of failure to obtain the prior consent of the families, of the census of voters, in the aforementioned percentage.”
For the magistrates, the problem that arises is that, “regardless of the reasonableness of submission to a prior family agreement, there is no decision-making body composed of families in the organic law on education.”
“Therefore, returning to the problem mentioned above, the contested provincial ordinance has erected families, without legal support and against the fundamental and organic powers, into a decision-making body with the capacity to blocking or veto, with prior capacity for negative resolution to the pronouncement of the School Council, a body which has the power to make a final decision both in the LOE and in the regional order, but in the latter, it is only maintained if the families agree in advance”, underlines the Chamber.
NAVARRA GOVERNMENT TO APPEAL SENTENCE
For his part, the Department of Education of the Government of Navarre announced that it will appeal to the Supreme Court against the ruling of the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the High Court of Justice of Navarre (TSJN) which annulled three articles of Regional Ordinance 106/2023 of 9 November, by which The types of working hours of the centers are regulated who teach second cycle teaching in early childhood education, primary education and special education in the Regional Community area.
In a press release, Education reiterated his “respect for the judicial decision”, but stressed his “disagree with the room’s assessmentconsidering that the regional order does not violate the precepts of the Organic Law of Education (LOMLOE)”.
The ministry stressed its “desire to safeguard the interests of Navarrese families of public education in the processes of regulating the type of school day in educational centers”.
In this regard, and “having full powers to decide directly on the type of school day in the centres public educational institutions”, the ministry stressed that “it wanted to develop, after a long consultation process, a standard that would regulate this issue with the participation of the entire educational community”.
As the TSJN himself said in his car, The department “consciously” regulated the family consultation procedure and to the closures and approval by the school councils of the type of school day of each center, “in full autonomy in their decision, taking into account, as a priority, the interests, needs and characteristics of the students and their families or legal representatives.”
