The TSJC obliges the Canet school to maintain 25% of Spanish

Canet de Mar School. / EFE

Dismisses the appeal of the families of students in the same course as the minor who requested it

EP

The Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC) has confirmed the precautionary measures of 25% of Castilian that it set in a group from the Turó del Drac school in Canet de Mar by dismissing the appeal for reinstatement of a series of families from the center that they opposed and demanded its revocation.

In an interlocutory, consulted by Europa Press and before which an appeal can be filed, the plaintiffs argued in their appeal for reconsideration that "an appearance of good law cannot be identified in this case."

The TSJC had already refused in March to lift the precautionary measures to establish the 25% of Spanish fixed in a group including, in addition to the subject of Spanish, at least one other non-linguistic curricular subject of a core or analogous nature.

In the appeal for reconsideration, the plaintiff families pointed out that the vehicular use of Spanish and Catalan "is not in accordance" with article 3 of the Constitution and the Statute of Catalonia, which recognizes the right of students to receive education in Catalan and not be separated into groups or centers for reasons of language.

The families argued in their appeal that "full linguistic normalization has not been reached, that the school acts as the only engine in this regard, and that the monolingual system is more effective in ensuring knowledge of the two official languages", and that the interlocutory violated an article of article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The court has recalled in the order to dismiss the appeal that the interlocutory that was wanted to be revoked reflected the criteria that it is necessary to consider in order to adopt precautionary measures and that it valued the precedents related to the use of the two languages ​​as the sentence in reference to the Catalan education system as a whole.

He has assured that the jurisprudence "has ruled out that a subjective right concurs in the students, so that it cannot be deduced that the application of the linguistic conjunction system entails an eventual irreparable damage to a supposed right of the students to a vehicular monolingual education" .

Source link