recent translations summaries

The Constitutional Court held that in applying section 8 (2) of the Act CXC of 2011 on National Public Education, it is a constitutional requirement arising from Article XVI (1) and (2) of the Fundamental Law that the exemption from attending kindergarten classes shall always apply to the given kindergarten year only. The request for exemption may be submitted for the first time or (in the case of a previous request for exemption) repeatedly by 15 April of the year in which the child reaches the age of five; the request for exemption may not be rejected without examination on the merits on formal grounds if the parent submits the request for exemption for the first time only by 15 April of the year when the child reaches the age of five. In the proceedings before the initiating court, the applicant plaintiff the exemption of his four-year-old child from attending kindergarten classes on the grounds that the child had not been integrated. The Government Office rejected the plaintiff’s application on the basis of the contested provision. According to the contested provision, in the educational year when the child reaches the age of four, the possibility of exemption can only be examined on the merits if a “new application” is submitted. However, the plaintiff requested for the first time that his child be exempted from kindergarten education, and therefore the objective condition for an assessment of the merits of the request was missing. According to the initiating judge, a measure which excludes the possibility of exemption for the years preceding the school-preparatory year without a constitutional reason violates the parent’s right to education and does not ensure an education in the best interests of the child. In its decision, the Constitutional Court found that the mere grammatical interpretation of the contested provision does indeed allow for an interpretation that is contrary to the best interests of the child and thus ultimately contrary to the Fundamental Law. In the present case, the legislative objective, which can be established by a teleological interpretation in accordance with the Fundamental Law, cannot be ascertained beyond doubt, since neither the governmental office acting as respondent in the main proceedings nor the petitioner itself recognised it. The plenary session of the Constitutional Court has therefore formulated a constitutional requirement in relation to the contested provision, namely that the request for exemption may be submitted for the first time or repeatedly until 15 April of the year when the child reaches the age of five.