How Parents' Committee have taken a series of contacts with other similar groups of parents and / or teachers, all committed to the defense of public schools. The Parents' Committee of Florence in recent months has proved very active in this regard. One of his initiative is an appeal against the ministerial circular relating to the registration and, through it, the plan School reorganization that underlies it. Below are a significant excerpt of Appeal (the full text is the site of the Parents' Committee of Florence, www.retescuole.net). In that action, if continued in subsequent judicial offices, will bring its contribution to our Parents' Committee. Anyone interested in supporting this initiative are invited to contact us.
Regional Administrative Court of Lazio
ACTION
(...) Against
Ministry of Education '
AND RESEARCH (now MIUR), in the person of the Minister pro-tempore in
office;
MINISTRY OF ECONOMY AND FINANCE
in the person of the Minister pro-tempore in office
COUNCIL OF MINISTERS, in the person of the President in office protempore
after suspension for the cancellation of the CM
No 4 MIUR prot. No 381/RUU 04 of 15 January 2009
not formally published concerning "
school enrollment of children and schools of all levels, regarding the 2009/2010 school year
" in part on information in the school
childhood and the first cycle, as well as any other act in mind,
connected and consequential, including all acts of implementation, not known
and with regard to any
schema Plan Programmatic
provided by the Ministry of Education, University and Research (now MIUR) in consultation with the Ministry of Economy and Finance
and still
not formally adopted. FACT
(...)
On 03.09.2008, the Ministry of Education in cooperation with the Ministry of Economy and Finance has prepared
scheme
programmatic plan of action "aimed at further rationalization of human resources
and instrumental
available, offering greater effectiveness and efficiency of the education system
"said scheme has been sent to the prescribed
opinions on both the relevant committees Both the parliamentary Joint Conference
art. 8 DL.vo No 281/97. On 27/11/2008 the
VII Commission of the Chamber of Deputies and on 03/12/2008
the Commission VII of the Senate have expressed opinions provided,
which, however, contain numerous conditions under which the Ministry of Education would be
should follow the formal adoption of that plan.
Following these views with the comments
MIUR in cooperation with the Ministry of Economy and Finance should have considered the observations contained in the opinions and
provide
after the formal adoption of the Plan.
To date, however, that plan has not been formally adopted
.
On the basis of the "program plan", duly adopted after the acquisition of prescribed
opinions, the Government should have
issue the regulations referred to in art. 17, paragraph 2 of Law No 400/88,
looking at the following location:
a) proposal for the Ministry of Education in cooperation with the Ministry of Economy and Finance
.
b) Acquisition of the opinion of the Joint Conference under Legislative Decree n.
281/97.
c) Opinion of the State Council.
d) Resolution of the Council of Ministers.
Pending those proceedings, MIUR, on the basis of a draft regulation
, with the contested
the CM has given instructions for registration pupils for the school year 2009/2010;
these instructions, however, anticipate legislation still under development and are required by law
currently in force and with all the training organization
adopted in educational institutions and in particular the
POF of each school, as is known, it must take
before the school year.
It should also be noted that on 28.01.2009 the Conference
Unified art. 8 DL.vo No 281/97 made the required
opinion on the draft Regulation, it is clear from the opinion so that
clear majority of the regions have
ANCI negative opinion and with reference to the schema of
programmatic plan for both cuts in staff and co-presences,
for inclusive education.
addition, the date of 12/02/2009 National Council of PI
unanimously expressed a negative opinion on the draft Regulation
, stating in its conclusions, "which highlighted the critical
up a training framework that:
It compromises the effectiveness of training in schools and early childhood
cycle of education;
affects the dignity of public education;
No offer equal opportunity and choice
throughout the country. "
The MIUR, despite these negative opinions has maintained that the contested
CM, in blatant violation of existing legislation, gives
mandatory provisions as if the regulation, still under development, was already in place
, however, as the draft rules, including the CM
contrasts with the pattern of the program plan.
(...)
In light of the above, briefly state it is clear that the Ministry
appeal with the CM did not limit himself to inform the families of
measures pending that could change
the attitude of the school system, but gave indications
operating as if such measures were already adopted and
were already binding and indeed has attached models of applications for registration
prepared in accordance with the legislation still being
adoption .
The applicants are parents of children who
In school year 2009/2010 will have to attend school and / or primary and
school teachers and primary , all interested in maintaining the current organizational structure
and primary school both in terms of teaching effectiveness, is also
for concrete work and family needs.
The contraction of school time, the abolition of co-presences,
the introduction of the teacher are prevalent
provided some of the interventions that have a very negative
teaching effectiveness and educational organization with the consequent contraction of even the
school staff.
LAW
The challenged acts are unlawful for the following REASONS
1) violation of constitutional principles and in particular Articles
. 3, 33 AND 34 COST. (...)
2) VIOLATION OF ARTICLE. No. 64, 25.6.2008 112
amended and converted into Law 06.08.2008 N. 133 E
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE. COST 97. (...)
3) VIOLATION OF ARTICLE. COST 97. AND EXCESS POWER FOR OBVIOUS INCONSISTENCY
'and injustice. (...)
4) declares that Article. 64, 3rd and 4th
PARAGRAPH OF DL 25.6.2008 N. 112, converted with amendments into Law 06.08.2008 N.
133 AND ART. 4
No. 9 DL 01/09/2008 137, L. C. TO IN 30/10/2008, N.
FOR VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 169. 77 AND 97 OF THE CONSTITUTION. (...)
5) VIOLATION OF ARTICLE. 3, 33 AND 34 COST.
ON THE PRINCIPLE OF SELF-EDUCATION STATE SYSTEM
. (...)
6) A BREACH OF THE PRINCIPLE OF AUTONOMY
SCHOOL OF ARTICLES. 33, PARAGRAPH 1 AND 117, PARAGRAPH 2
COST. AND ART. Presidential Decree No. 3 275/1999. (...)
7) VIOLATION OF ARTICLE. 4 DLN 133/08, C. L. TO IN 169/08 E
THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY IN ART. 3 COST.
AND THE RIGHT TO EDUCATION IN THE ARTS. 33 and 34. (...)
8) declares that Article. 64, 3rd and 4th
PARAGRAPH OF DL 25.6.2008 N. 112, L. C. TO IN 06/08/2008 No 133 E
ART. 4 No DL 137/08 TO IN L. C. 169/08
FOR VIOLATION OF ARTICLES. 3, 70 97 E 117 of the Constitution.
ILLEGAL 'DERIVATIVE. (...)
9) declares that Article. 64, 3rd paragraph
OF DL 25.6.2008 N. 112, C. TO IN LN 133/08, WITH RESPECT
ART. 117, 3rd and 6th PARAGRAPH OF COST. (...) Application for suspension
The prima facie case is quite clear, the CM
it lacks any legal basis.
The danger in delay is also evident, as evidenced by the fact
news print most of the families called for the full-time basis to appeals
that CM is not only warranted, but is offered without
presence and therefore strongly
resized.
Finally it should be noted that the CM requires appeal to families with no choice
a certain proposal. PQM
It calls, following, where appropriate, referral to the Constitutional Court
the issue of unconstitutionality of art. 64, No DL
112, 2008, in L. c.to No And Article 133 of 06/10/1908. 4 of Decree 137/08
c.to in L. 30/10/2008 No 169 for violation of Art. 3, 33,
34, 70, 77, 97, 117 paragraph 2, 3 and 6, the acceptance of the appeal
consequent annulment of the contested measures with each
consequential effect of the victory of law and court fees.
(...) Rome, 12/03/2009
0 comments:
Post a Comment