Angel Rodriguez, professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Malaga.
Angel Rodriguez (Malaga, 60 years), professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Malaga, appreciates the Government’s announcement of resorting to the veto of parental Murcia.
Question. what Is the Constitutional veto parental leave?
Response. As the majority of the time in Law, it depends. It depends on what we understand by pin parental and to what it applies to. How are activities co-curricular, extra-curricular, supplementary, a trip to the field? All of that are shades important. If the aim is that parents can exempt their children from receiving certain knowledge or do not engage in activities that are in the curriculum, as established in the law, accountable, qualifying, as a kind of conscientious objection that I do think that it would be unconstitutional. It is as if I don’t believe in mathematics or in vaccines and I do not want my child to go to a talk of sanitary habits.
Q. How do you protect the Constitution the right to education of the child?
A. Is in article 27, which was the most complex to draw up and approve, which did endanger the consensus constituent. We are touching a very sensitive issue and, precisely for this reason, attempts to reach a consensus. For this topic, on the one hand there is a principle of the right to education is universal, compulsory and free basic education, which allows a large intervention of the State. But at the same time guarantees freedom of education and gives powers to parents and teachers to be able to intervene. There is an intermediate situation, and that’s why after 40 years there is some war in school, change the education laws, etc
Q. And what about in the case of the veto parental, how to apply the Constitution?
MORE INFORMATION
Citizens give in to Vox and agree to keep the ‘pin parental’ in Murcia The Government requires PP, Cs, and Vox dropped in Murcia the ‘pin parental’ in the school
A. the Constitution guarantees The right of parents to the religious and moral education in conformity with their convictions. Therefore, there is scope for them to intervene in the education of their children, but certainly not for content of character curricular or citizen.
Q. what are The limits of “moral” standards would include, for example, a sex education or equality?
A. no, that is Not moral. This is not within the capacity of the parents to say: “I don’t want my son to tell him that.” This is contrary to the right of the education of the children. The Constitution itself says that education aims at the full development of the personality in the respect for democratic principles in the fundamental rights and freedoms. That is not debatable. There can not tell the parents: “This is not”. Now, religious and moral training, then, yes. With a clear understanding that yes we could talk about a regulation unconstitutional, I think the discussion is premature, because we still do not have a regulation that we can say: we have passed you on these points. It is a controversy is fundamentally political.
Q. The Government has announced that it will use. What court should I go?
A. Depends. Could come for substantive aspects, which the regulations exclude content substantial, or subject of powers, because the education is transferred to the communities, but the State has powers of primary legislation, which limits the ability of the autonomies. If we are talking about a standard as a matter of law to autonomy, the only possible way is the Constitutional Court. If it is of a regulatory nature, would also be open to the contentious administrative. In any case, if there is an appeal by the State, the standard autonomic is automatically suspended. The suspicion of unconstitutionality is strong, but will have to wait to examine the standard in concrete.
