>DOKUMENT : AN01670

>ZAUPNOST :

>REPUB : 5

>VRSTAD : 01

>DVLOG : 960404

>VRSTAV : 20

>VRSTAA : 03

>DODL : 981022

>VODL : 1

>VREŠ : 06

>JEZIK : 2

>DVHOD : 981106

>POD :

P5 Upbringing and Education

>ZADEVA :

U-I-94/96

>EVIDENCA :

E-82/98

>IMEVLAG :

Jo_e Gjuran and Valerija Perger, Lendava

>AKT :

Act on the Organization and Financing of Upbringing and Education (ZOFVI), Art. 3, Para. 3

>PROBLEM :

Protection of national origin.

Bilingual schools.

Principle of the consistency of statutes with international law and with ratified international agreements.

Principle of equality before the law.

Exercise and restriction of rights.

Education and schooling.

Profession of national affiliation.

Special rights of the Hungarian national community in Slovenia.

Hungarian national community.

Legal basis:

Constitution, Arts. 8, 14, 15, 57, 61, 64

Kindergartens Act (ZVrt), Arts. 5, 6, 7

Vocational and Professional Training Act (ZPSI), Art. 8

Primary School Act (ZOsn), Arts. 19, 48

Secondary School Act (ZGim), Art. 8

Higher Education Act (ZVis), Art. 8

Act on the Establishment of Municipalities and the Determination of their Territory (ZUODNO), Art. 5

Outline Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, Art. 4

Agreement on Friendship and Cooperation between the Republic of Slovenia and the Republic of Hungary, Art. 2

Agreement on Guaranteeing Special Rights of the Slovenian national community in the Republic of Hungary and of the Hungarian national community in the Republic of Slovenia, Art. 2

Act on the Exercise of Special Rights of Members of the Italian and Hungarian National Community in the Area of Upbringing and Education (ZUPP), Arts. 4, 5, 11, 12

Constitutional Court Act (ZUstS), Art. 40

>SKLEPI :

>IZREK :

Art. 3, Para. 3 of the Act on the Organization and Financing of Upbringing and Education is not inconsistent with the Constitution.

>TEKST :

In Art. 64, the Constitution provides that bilingual schooling is compulsory and authorizes the legislature to determine the areas in which it is compulsory. It imposes on the legislature the duty to organize such schooling, and it only leaves it the discretion to determine the areas in which it is compulsory. The basic starting-point in determining the areas in which bilingual schooling is compulsory is that it relates to the special rights of the indigenous Italian and Hungarian national community.

Art. 14, Para. 2 of the Constitution provides that every person is equal before the law. This of course does not mean that a legal regulation should not differently determine the position of legal subjects, but that it must not do this arbitrarily, without a sound and well founded reason. This means that differentiation must serve a constitutionally permissible goal, that this goal must rationally be related to the matter of determination in the legal regulation, and that the established differentiation must be a proper means for achieving this goal. Thus, for differentiation to be permitted, a well founded reason, deriving from the nature of the matter, must exist. Bilingual schooling, as the special right of an indigenous national community to equality before the law, does not by itself encroach on the right of the members of the majority population. The Constitution does not prevent the legislature from determining within the limits of its discretion, criteria according to which it may differentiate between certain similar states of facts and apply them with different legal consequences. Such discretion, by which the legislature pursues constitutionally permissible goals, is a crucial component of legislative power.

Besides the thus determined limits of the legislature's discretion, consideration must be given to the fact that the establishment of bilingual schools is imposed on the State by the Constitution. The selection of the areas in which such schools will be established, and the areas in which the special rights of an indigenous minority concerning the field of education will be guaranteed by establishing minority schools, is left to the legislature. Historical circumstances have dictated the organization of bilingual schools in the areas where the Hungarian national community lives, and not also in the areas populated by the Italian national community. The preservation of the organization or network of bilingual schools also entails respecting the obligations that Slovenia contracted by ratified international agreements, and is not inconsistent with the Constitution (i.e. with Art. 14 of the Constitution).

The Constitution in Art. 57, Para. 3 imposes on the State the duty to provide opportunities for all citizens to obtain a proper education. This entails the duty of ensuring equal opportunities for pupils to obtain such a level of compulsory primary education that will enable them, according to their wishes and abilities, to continue with a proper education after they finish primary school. The petitioners in no manner showed that the pupils of bilingual schools had been, concerning the quality of knowledge obtained (considering school grades and their results on the final examination), in a different position, or even discriminated against, in comparison with other pupils (of "regular" or minority schools). According to these circumstances, the differences between pupils do not necessarily, or not at all, depend on the fact that the individual attends a bilingual school. A bilingual school, in so far as the compulsory learning of a minority language is required, also does not entail an encroachment on the right of Slovenian children to use their language and script.

>AVTOR :

>OBJAVA :

Official Gazette RS, No. 77/98

>POSLANO :

>OPOMBA :

FULL TEXT:

U-I-94/96

22 October 1998

D E C I S I O N

At a session held on 22 October 1998 in proceedings to review constitutionality, instituted by the petition of Jo_e Gjuran and Valerija Perger, both from Lendava, and by Marjan _erdin, from _entiba, the Constitutional Court

d e c i d e d:

Art. 3, Para. 3 of the Act on the Organization and Financing of Upbringing and Education (Official Gazette RS, No. 12/96) is not inconsistent with the Constitution.

R e a s o n i n g:

1. The petitioners challenged the statutory provision, stated in the disposition, according to which, in the areas in which members of the Slovenian nation live together with members of the Hungarian national community, bilingual kindergartens and schools are established. The petitioners opined that by the thus determined manner of education, Slovenian children were put in an unequal position compared to children living in other parts of Slovenia where for members of the Slovenian nation the teaching language is Slovenian. In particular, the challenged provision allegedly determined, contrary to Art. 14 of the Constitution, different types of education for the areas in which members of the Hungarian national community live than for the areas populated by the Italian national community. And as such, also a different extent of knowledge for children to learn was allegedly required, in that Slovenian children living in the bilingual area were allegedly obliged to have a command of the Hungarian language to the same extent as the Slovenian language.

2. According to the petitioners, bilingual education required of children more effort spent on studying, thus causing them to learn much less than children in single-language schools. Concerning the nature of the teaching materials in both languages, in order to understand all the materials, a command of both languages, to the same extent, was allegedly necessary. Thus, someone who mastered the required materials in Slovenian, could not allegedly receive a grade proportionate to their knowledge, if they did not also master the same materials in Hungarian. A consequence of bilingual schools was allegedly also a worse command of Slovenian. The petitioners opined that the education of members of the Hungarian national community should be organized in the same manner as for members of the Italian national community. Furthermore, they specifically emphasized that they were not against children learning the Hungarian language, but only against such, i.e. bilingual, type of learning, which was allegedly inconsistent with Arts. 14, 57, and 62 of the Constitution.

3. The National Assembly replied to the petition, by arguing that the Italian and Hungarian national communities, as indigenous national communities in Slovenia, had a special status pursuant to the Constitution and other legislation. This allegedly followed from the fact that it was not enough if members of national communities were ensured the same rights as members of the majority nation. Italians and Hungarians living in Slovenia could not be equal before the law [to Slovenians) if not additionally entitled to special rights, these being either collective, which referred to their national communities, or individual, referring to their members. In this connection, also the principle under Art. 4 of the Outline Convention for the Protection of National Minorities was to be considered, which provided that the measures taken as a consequence of considering the special circumstances in which members of a minority lived, could not be treated as discrimination against members of the majority nation. The purpose of protecting national communities was to insure their existence, development, and the personal, cultural and other characteristics of the society, and their members and milieu, in which they lived.

4. Furthermore, the National Assembly argued that the positive concept of protecting minorities had already been introduced in the 1974 Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Slovenia. In this sense, the 1991 Constitution entailed a continuity in this area. The same starting-points were also, earlier or subsequently, introduced by international agreements: for example, the Agreement on Friendship and Cooperation between the Republic of Slovenia and the Republic of Hungary, and the Agreement on Ensuring the Special Rights of the Slovenian National Community in the Republic of Hungary and the Hungarian National Community in the Republic of Slovenia. In the National Assembly's view, the challenged statutory provision regulated the manner of exercising the right of the Hungarian national community to education in its own language as provided under Art. 64 of the Constitution. At the same time this measure was also aimed at sustaining the coexistence of the two nations living in a nationally mixed area. The bilingual regulation of the teaching language was adopted by the National Assembly by a required majority, which also obtained the support of the representatives of the respective national community (Art. 64, Para. 5 of the Constitution). The assertion of the petitioners that, as a result of this measure taken for protecting the national community, the rights of the members of the majority nation had been violated, allegedly seriously contradicted with generally valid principles of international law and with international agreements that bind Slovenia: [as the already mentioned] measures taken for protecting members of a minority nation could not be viewed as discrimination against the majority nation.

5. The self-governing national community of Lendava in the Prekmurje region stated that bilingual schooling was established in 1959. Prior to that, Hungarian schools also operated in the Prekmurje region as well as in the Primorje region. However, the then existing historical situation prevented Hungarian pupils from continuing their secondary and college education in Hungarian schools, yet schools in Vojvodina were too far for these pupils to attend. Therefore, a majority of parents enrolled their children in Slovenian schools, this resulted in Hungarian [primary] schools being empty. Thus, the bilingual model of teaching was adopted as a solution to prevent the decline of minority schooling in Prekmurje.

6. The [above-mentioned] national community also stated that the model of bilingual schooling was constantly being changed and reformed. The Slovenian and Hungarian languages were being taught on two levels, which may externally have been distinguished, that is, on the level of mother tongue (level 1) and on the level of environment language (level 2). The Slovenian language was, from the third grade on, considered the State language, which all pupils on the first level of education[1] learned. The teaching language is Slovenian and Hungarian, but pupils are not required to have a command of both languages to the same extent. Pupils were graded through examinations carried out in the Slovenian language, and grades obtained in the Hungarian language did not affect the general grades of a pupil. At bilingual schools the same textbooks were used as at Slovenian schools, which were only translated for first level education [i.e. the first four years of primary education]. For second level education [i.e. from the fifth to the eighth grade of primary education], bilingual textbooks were not prepared, which particularly was to the disadvantage of Hungarian pupils. The teaching language during the second level of primary education is 70% Slovenian and 30% Hungarian, which originated from the fact that a majority of pupils continue their education in Slovenian secondary schools.

7. During the forty years of the existence of bilingual schools, allegedly few complaints by parents have been filed. Pupils have achieved good results in secondary schools in Slovenia, as well as in Hungary. The common examination of eighth grade pupils proved that the success of pupils in bilingual schools did not lag behind the success of their coevals anywhere in Slovenia. The introduction of the Italian model of minority schooling would be like returning to the year 1959. A very high percentage of pupils from nationally mixed families (i.e. between 40 and 60%), or pupils with Slovenian nationality (their percentage in bilingual schools varied between 30 and 50%) would probably continue their education in Slovenian schools. This would lead to the decline of the existing school network, and to the decline of minority schooling.

8. The Constitutional Court accepted the petition, and, in light of the fact that the conditions specified in Art. 26, Para. 4 of the Constitutional Court (Official Gazette RS, No. 15/94 - hereinafter: ZUstS) were fulfilled, immediately proceeded to decide the case on its merits.

B. - I.

9. In Art. 57 the Constitution provides that freedom of education is guaranteed and that primary education is compulsory, and imposes on the State the duty to provide opportunities for all citizens to obtain a proper education. Art. 61 of the Constitution vests in every individual the right to freely express affiliation with their nation or national community, to foster and give expression to their culture, and to use their own language and script. In the framework of the special rights of the indigenous national communities, Art. 64 provides: "... In accordance with the law, these two national communities and their members have the right to education and schooling in their own languages, as well as the right to plan and develop the same. The areas in which bilingual education is compulsory are determined by statute. ..."

10. Art. 3 of the Act on the Organization and Financing of Upbringing and Education (hereinafter: ZOFVI) regulates the teaching language in kindergartens and schools. In Para. 1 it provides that instruction and education in kindergartens or schools be carried out in the Slovenian language. In Para. 2 it provides that in the nationally mixed areas in which members of the Italian national community live, kindergartens and schools be established in which education is carried out in the Italian language (kindergartens and schools with the language of a national community). In the challenged Para. 3 it provides that in those nationally mixed areas in which members of the Hungarian national community live, bilingual kindergartens and schools be established in which education is carried out in the Slovenian and Hungarian languages (bilingual kindergartens and schools). Provisions on language and the special rights of minorities are included in all statutes which regulate upbringing and education.

11. Thus, the Kindergartens Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 12/96; hereinafter: ZVrt) in Art. 5 prescribes first of all, that the Slovenian language be the language in which instruction in kindergartens is carried out; secondly, that in nationally mixed areas in which members of the Italian national community live, according to a "special statute", in kindergartens in which education is in the Slovenian language, that the children learn the Italian language, and that in kindergartens in which education is in the Italian language, the children learn the Slovenian language; and thirdly, that in those nationally mixed areas in which members of the Hungarian national community live, education be, "according to a special statute", bilingual, that is, in the Slovenian and Hungarian languages. In Art. 6 of ZVrt there is a special provision that determines that the exercise of the special rights of the Italian and Hungarian national communities concerning preschool education be regulated by special statute.

12. The Primary School Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 12/96), in Art. 6, provides that the teaching language in primary school is Slovenian, and that in the primary schools operated only in the language of the national community, it be Italian, and in bilingual schools, Slovenian and Hungarian. In nationally mixed areas in which members of the Italian national community live, in "Slovenian" schools, the Italian language is prescribed as a compulsory language, and in "(minority) Italian" schools, however, the Slovenian language is prescribed. Art. 7 is also a general provision that determines that the protection of the special rights of the Italian and Hungarian national communities in the area of primary education be regulated by statute.

13. Statutes in the area of secondary education also have similar provisions on language (the Act on Occupational and Professional Education, in Art. 8, and the Secondary School Act, in Art. 8, both in Official Gazette RS, No. 12/96). For secondary schools the possibility of lessons taught in a foreign language is also provided. Concerning higher education (the Higher Education Act, Official Gazette RS, No. 67/93 - Art. 8) only Slovenian is prescribed as the teaching language, with the possibility of teaching being carried out in a foreign language.

14. Bilingual kindergartens and schools are, according to Art. 3 of ZOFVI, to be established in the areas in which members of the Slovenian nation as well as members of the Hungarian national community live, and which are defined as nationally mixed areas. The Act on the Establishment of Municipalities and the Determination of their Territory (Official Gazette RS, No. 60/94, hereinafter: ZUODNO) determined in Art. 5 such nationally mixed areas are to be those areas which were defined as such by the present charters of the municipalities of Lendava and Murska Sobota.

15. The charters of the former municipalities of Lendava and Murska Sobota defined nationally mixed areas by stating the settlements embraced by such an area. By establishing new municipalities nothing changed with the municipality of Lendava, for all nationally mixed areas remained in the framework of the new municipality of Lendava (all the petitioners are from this area). However, the new municipality of Murska Sobota no longer includes nationally mixed areas. A part of these areas was transferred to the new municipality of Hodoš-Šalovci, and another part to the new municipality of Moravske Toplice. This year such a division was changed by establishing additional new municipalities (ZUODNO-B, Official Gazette RS, No. 56/98): from the municipality of Lendava, a new municipality, Dobrovnik, with two nationally mixed areas was separated, and the municipality of Hodoš-Šalovci was divided into the municipality of Hodoš with two nationally mixed settlements, and the municipality of Šalovci with one nationally mixed settlement. Concerning the new division of nationally mixed settlements, and their joining to different municipalities, Art. 5 of ZUODNO was also changed in a manner providing that nationally mixed areas in Prekmurje be those areas defined by the present charters of the municipalities of Lendava, Hodoš-Šalovci and Moravske Toplice.

16. Pursuant to Art. 8 of the Constitution, statutes and other legal regulations must comply with generally valid principles of international law and must be in accord with international agreements which bind Slovenia. Ratified and published international agreements are to be used directly. In the case at issue, three are particularly:

- the Guideline Convention on the Protection of National Minorities (Official Gazette RS, No. 20/98, International Agreements, No. 4/98);

- the Agreement on Friendship and Cooperation between the Republic of Slovenia and the Republic of Hungary (Official Gazette RS, No. 23/93, International Agreements, No. 6/93); and

- the Agreement on Guaranteeing the Special Rights of the Slovenian National Minority in the Republic of Hungary and the Hungarian National Community in the Republic of Slovenia (Official Gazette RS, No. 23/93, International Agreements, No. 6/93).

B. - II.

17. The challenged Art. 3, Para. 3 of ZOFVI regulates the teaching language in kindergartens and schools established as bilingual kindergartens or schools in nationally mixed areas, according to ZOFVI and special statute. One such special statute still in force is the Act on Exercising the Special Rights of Members of Italian and Hungarian National Communities in the Field of Upbringing and Education (Official Gazette SRS, No. 12/82; hereinafter: ZUPP). ZUPP originated from a different constitutional system and particularly from a different system of education, therefore, concerning terminology it is not consistent with the valid legislation. But as regards its contents, it is important for the case at issue that this Act has general provisions, meaning that it regulates the special right to establish schools with the (teaching) language of a national community or bilingual schools without mentioning a particular minority (Italian or Hungarian). At the time of its adoption this was regulated by school legislation: e.g. the Primary School Act (Official Gazette SRS, No. 5/80 - Art. 19). In Art. 5, ZUPP quite generally also regulates that bilingual schools or schools with the teaching language of a national community be established in the areas defined as nationally mixed areas by the charters of municipalities. Thus, the challenged provision of ZOFVI regulates more than just the teaching language: on the basis of Art. 64 of the Constitution it determines the areas in which bilingual schooling is compulsory.

18. In Art. 64, the Constitution provides that bilingual schooling is compulsory and authorizes the legislature to determine the areas in which it is compulsory. It imposes on the legislature the duty to organize such schooling, and it only leaves it the discretion to determine the areas in which it is compulsory. The basic starting-point in determining the areas in which bilingual schooling is compulsory is that it relates to the special rights of the indigenous Italian and Hungarian national community.

19. The proposal of the petitioners that minority schooling also be introduced in Prekumurje, equal to the that organized on the Coast for the Italian national community, would mean the practical cancellation of bilingual schooling. For this reason alone the Constitutional Court cannot accept this proposal. Thus, the subject of review in this section is only whether the statute is constitutional concerning the determination of the areas of bilingual schooling.

20. As one of the special rights of indigenous national communities, the Draft Constitution (Reporter, No. 17/90) also envisaged the right to upbringing and education in one's own language, with the possibility that statute may also regulate bilingual upbringing and education. The representatives of the minority supported this option, which entails the possibility of bilingual schooling, and this was not disputed regarding the unified view that the extent of minority rights should not be reduced, or narrowed. This was also guaranteed to the indigenous national communities by the Basic Constitutional Charter on the Independence and Sovereignty of the Republic of Slovenia (Official Gazette RS, No. 1/91; It. III, Para. 2); the protection and guaranty of their rights being one of the basic constitutional principles (Art. 5, Para. 1 of the Constitution).

21. Obviously it is not disputed what bilingual schooling means: a school in which teaching is carried out in the Slovenian language and the language of a minority. Concerning the language itself, "bilingual" system also applies to areas in which the Italian national community lives: children in Slovenian schools are also obliged to learn Italian, which is also the case for children in Italian schools being obliged to learn Slovenian.

22. Evidently for the Hungarian national community and its individual members, it is not disputed that bilingual schooling appropriately and efficiently guarantees the exercise of their constitutional right to upbringing and education in their own language. Moreover, for the existence and development of the Hungarian minority, the established system of bilingual schooling is allegedly more appropriate than schooling in the minority language. Even if the reasons for the introduction of this system were mainly political or historical, today it is grounded on actual living conditions. Bilingual schooling allegedly guarantees minority members, on the one hand, education in their own language (including the preservation of their linguistic, historical and cultural identity) and, on the other hand, such a level of education both in Slovenian and in their mother tongue that enables them on equal grounds to pursue their further education and adjust themselves to future life in Slovenia (and also in Hungary).

23. The petitioners also do not oppose bilingual schooling as the right of the members of a national community. However, they oppose Art. 4 of ZUPP, which provides that in bilingual schools, members of the Slovenian nation attend classes together with members of a respective national community. According to Art. 48 of the Primary School Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 12/96), which is, pursuant to the Constitution, the only [type of] compulsory school in Slovenia, parents have the right to enroll their children for primary school in a school area in which the children permanently or temporarily live. They may enroll them in another primary school (i.e. in a school area which is outside the place of the children's residence) only if this school agrees with such registration. This means that parents might only be able to enroll children who live in an area designated as an area of compulsory bilingual schooling only in a bilingual primary school. The existence of bilingual schooling thus allegedly encroached on the right of members of the majority nation in that it violates the human rights protected under Arts. 14, 57 and 61 of the Constitution.

24. According to Art. 15, Para. 3 of the Constitution, the restriction of human rights and basic freedoms is only permissible with regard to others' rights and in cases determined by the Constitution. The Guideline Convention for the Protection of National Minorities contains in Art. 4 the obligation of Party States to guarantee the members of national communities the right to equality before the law, and to adopt necessary measures for fostering full and efficient equality among the members of the national minority and the members of the majority nation. The Signatory States must also consider the special circumstances of the members of national minorities. However, it is explicitly written in the Convention that such measures are not considered an act of discrimination.

In Art. 2 of the Agreement on Friendship and Cooperation Slovenia and Hungary specified that they view national minorities as a natural connecting bridge, and are certain that the contribution of the minorities to the life of their society is invaluable. Moreover, in Art. 2 of the Agreement on Guaranteeing the Special Rights of Minorities or National Communities, a support agreement was contracted not only concerning lessons offered to the members of the minority in the mother tongue, and the teaching of their mother tongue, but also concerning fostering the knowledge and learning of the language, culture and history of the minority and its central nation, also by the members of the majority nation.

25. Art. 14, Para. 2 of the Constitution provides that every person is equal before the law. Certainly this does not mean that legal regulation should not differently regulate the position of legal subjects, but that it may not do this arbitrarily, without a sound and well founded reason. This means that differentiation must serve a constitutionally permissible goal, that this goal must be rationally related to the subject of regulation in the law, and that the introduced differentiation must be an appropriate means for reaching this objective. For differentiation to be permitted, there must exist a rational reason originating from the nature of the matter. Bilingual schooling as a special right of an indigenous national community by itself does not encroach on the rights of the members of the majority nation to equality before the law. The Constitution does not prevent the legislature from determining within the limits (framework) of its competence, criteria on the basis of which, to differentiate between certain similar states of facts and apply them with different legal consequences. This kind of discretion, by which the legislature pursues constitutionally permissible goals, is a crucial component of the legislative power.

26. Reviewing the challenged regulation, besides the thus determined limits of the legislature's discretion, consideration must be given to the fact that the establishment of bilingual schools is imposed on the State by the Constitution. The selection of the areas in which such schools are to be established, and the areas in which special rights as regards education are to be guaranteed to an indigenous minority by founding minority schools, is left to the legislature. Historical circumstances dictated the organization of bilingual schooling in areas in which the Hungarian national community (minority) lives, but not also in areas populated by the Italian national community (minority). The preservation of the organization of the network of bilingual schools, also entails respecting the obligations that Slovenia contracted by ratified international agreements, and is not contrary to the Constitution (i.e. to Art. 14 of the Constitution).

27. Yet this matter could concern an encroachment on some other constitutional right or basic freedom: the petitioners assert the right to acquire a proper education and the right to use one's own language and script. Regarding this matter, the arguments of the petitioners are not well-founded.

28. In Art. 11 ZUPP provides that educational work in bilingual (kindergartens and) schools must be organized in a manner so that pupils learn their mother tongue and develop their capability for the active knowledge of another language. Which materials should be taught in a bilingual school in both languages and which only in one language, is determined by an educational program in primary school (Art. 12 of ZUPP). The educational program in primary school, including a list of subjects and curriculum for bilingual schools in the framework of general instructions and goals for the work of bilingual primary schools, inter alia also refers to:

- the adjustment of curricula which derive from a need to include the teaching of the Hungarian language and Hungarian history, art and culture;

- special programs for enrolling pupils who come from single-language areas in bilingual schools, and a special manner for grading pupils concerning the other (non-mother-tongue) language;

- that a grade from another language should not prevent pupils from advancing;

- that a pupil, concerning grades and examinations in all subjects, be graded on the basis of their answers in their mother tongue;

- that a pupil must always and all the time have a chance to participate in lessons using their mother tongue;

- that bilingual work must guarantee quality educational work and enable pupils an equal opportunity to pursue their advanced education.

29. From the legal regulations and acts mentioned in the previous point, it follows that the petitioners are not persuasive when arguing that Slovenian children in bilingual schools would have to equally master Hungarian as well as Slovenian, that for passing examinations they would have to master both languages to the same extent, and that they could not obtain a grade proportionate to their knowledge shown, if they did not master study materials both in Slovenian and Hungarian.

30. The educational program in primary school is basically the same for all primary schools, however in the case of bilingual schools, their schedule of subjects and curriculum are specially adjusted. As for the language of a national community, Slovenian children living in all areas in which indigenous national communities live, are also obliged to learn it. In this matter, the Slovenian children living in bilingual areas in Prekmurje are in an equal position to the Slovenian children dwelling in the areas in which the Italian national community lives. To put it simply, both cases concern an additional compulsory subject for pupils to learn. Concerning an equal burden imposed on pupils in view of the weekly or yearly number of classes, the adjustment of a schedule of lessons entails an appropriate arrangement of lessons, which also entails the adjustment of curricula with regard to their contents, if the quality of lessons as regards their contents and the extent of materials is to remain the same. Both equally applied to minority and bilingual schools.

31. A special feature of bilingual school is certainly also lessons of other subjects in both languages. According to the General Instructions and Goals for Work in Bilingual Primary Schools, all subjects during first level education are taught bilingually, with pupils using bilingual textbooks and workbooks. However, on the advanced level of primary education, the treatment of topics is in Slovenian, yet their broadening, consolidation and analysis with notes on terminology are in Hungarian.

32. In Art. 57, the Constitution imposes on the State the duty to provide opportunities for all citizens to obtain a proper education. This entails the obligation to ensure equal opportunities for obtaining such a level of compulsory primary school education that enables the individual to continue their proper education according to their wishes and capabilities. The petitioners do not by any means show that pupils of bilingual schools are, concerning the quality of knowledge learned (considering school grades and the results of final examinations), in a different position, or even discriminated against, compared to other pupils (in "regular" or minority schools). The differences between pupils resulting from these circumstances do not necessarily, or not at all, depend only on the fact that the individual attends a bilingual school. Similarly, a bilingual school, as far as the learning of a minority language is also required, does not entail an encroachment on the right of Slovenian children to use their language and script.

33. Accordingly, the Constitutional Court decided that the challenged statutory provision was not unconstitutional.

[1] Translator's note: Slovenian primary school consists of eight years of education. The lessons of the first four years, which here means the first level of education, are taught by a single teacher, and are usually taught in such a manner that each class of pupils remains in the same room during the lessons. That is why this level of education is called "razredni pouk", or, translated, "class lessons". Whereas it is typical of the next four years, from the fifth to the eighth grade, this being the second level education, that pupils have separate teachers for different courses. This type of education is thus called "predmetni pouk", or, in translation, "subject lessons".