For years Åtefan Stoain was carried on his motherās back so he could attend his class on a second-floor classroom. On several occasions Åtefan was refused support by the school to access the bathroom, leaving him soiled and a target to bullying.
Last Tuesday, the 25 June 2019, the European Court of Human Rights added one more indignity by ruling against Åtefan, a quadriplegic teenager, on a case he and his mother brought against Romania for denial of the right to education.
On ruling against Åtefan, the court shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the right of inclusive education and non-discrimination, in light of Romaniaās legal obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the courtās own jurisprudence, in particular the Enver Sahin v Turkey case.
Stoianās legal team argued that:
- Åtefanās right to education had been violated due to the repeated refusals to provide him with in-class personal assistance, support and reasonable accommodations.
- Åtefanās rights to non-discrimination and freedom from degrading treatment has been repeatedly violated due to the conditions he was subjected to.
- The treatment he experienced amounted to an infringement of his private and family rights.
- Remedies that were granted by the national court were never implemented by Romanian authorities.
Fundamental failings in the ruling
Their case was supported by third party interventions from the European Disability Forum, the International Disability Alliance, the CentrulĀ EuropeanĀ pentruĀ DrepturileĀ CopiilorĀ cuĀ DizabilitÄÅ£i, Inclusion International and Inclusion Europe, Validity, Amnesty International, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Regional Network for Inclusive Education Latin America.
The ruling against Åtefan shows fundamental failures including:
- The Court blames Åtefanās mother rather that recognising the duty of Romania to ensure the right to education for all students.
- The Court does not understand the difference between accessibility and reasonable accommodation, for instance qualifying āarchitectural accessibility of the school buildingsā as reasonable accommodation.
- The Court considers that minimum efforts by the state is sufficient to comply with the right to education, even when they do not address the needs of the student.
- The Court did not consider Romaniaās obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
Finally, we find it deplorable that the Court did not recognise the importance of the case and allocated it to a Committee that does not allow for appeal. It is inadmissible that a case which raised novel issues and attracted numerous third-party interventions received so little scrutiny.
ECHR needs to comply with UN CRPD
We, the undersigned organisations, urge the European Court of Human Rights to comply with the most recent international human rights laws, including the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which guarantees the right of every person with disabilities to education.
Inclusion Europe
European Association of Service Providers for Persons with Disabilities
European Network of (ex)-Users and Survivors of Psychiatry
European Network of Independent Living
International Disability Alliance
National Council of Persons with Disability in Romania
