Denominational schools should no longer have the
right to discriminate in favour of enrolling children on the basis of
their religion, the Ombudsman for Children has said.
Emily Logan,
in a submission to the Department of Education on draft legislation on
school admissions, also calls for an end to preferential access for the
children of past pupils.
Minister for Education
Ruairí Quinn published the general scheme of the Education (Admissions
to Schools) Bill in September, to provide a new regulatory framework for
school enrolment procedures and to provide a new appeals mechanism.
In her advice, published yesterday, Ms Logan
says the general right currently enjoyed by denominational schools to
give preferential access to children of their faith should end. This
right is protected in section 7 of the Equal Status Act, which allows
schools to discriminate on the grounds of religion if necessary to
protect their ethos.
Head three of the scheme
reaffirms this right. Ms Logan notes this has been criticised by
international human rights bodies including the UN Committee on the
Rights of the Child.
She
says in circumstances where a denominational school is oversubscribed,
children not of its denomination, or of none, are at an unfair
disadvantage.
“Children should not have
preferential access to publicly funded education on the basis of their
religion and that the Equal Status Act should reflect that principle.”
However,
she is mindful of the protection afforded to denominational education
in the Constitution. This could be protected, she says, by way of a
derogation to be sought from the Minister if a school’s student body was
beginning to no longer reflect the school’s denominational ethos.
However,
the derogation provided in the scheme allowing schools, in some
circumstances, to give preference to children of past pupils is
“unjustifiable” and should be removed.
“It can give rise to instances of indirect discrimination against particular groups of children,” she says. “As noted, the European Commission
Against Racism and Intolerance expressed its concern at the impact this
can have on Travellers and children of immigrant background.”
Though the automatic right of schools to do this has been restricted in the scheme, she says, it still cannot be justified.
“Putting
children without an intergenerational connection with a school at a
disadvantage vis-a-vis those with such a connection when there is high
demand on limited spaces is not justifiable. In light of this . . . the
Ombudsman for Children believes that the derogation contained in
regulation 15 should be removed.”
She also raises concern about a proposed power for schools to refuse admission to a child based on the advice of the HSE or An Garda Síochána.
“Invoking
this power clearly involves a significant interference with a child’s
right to access education. This is placed in stark relief by the fact
that there is no explicit provision made for how a child’s right to
education will otherwise be vindicated.” She says the scheme gives no
reason for the inclusion of this provision, nor demonstrates its
necessity. This power “should be removed”.
The
scheme proposes to get rid of the “section 29” appeals mechanism under
which parents or guardians of a child who has been refused a school
place can appeal to the Department of Education. Parents are to instead
appeal to the school’s board of management.
Ms
Logan is concerned at the removal of the “entirely independent” section
29 appeals committee and recommends that it be retained.