El PRoBlEMáTICo RECoNoCIMIENTo DE lA CoRTE SUPREMA ARgENTINA DE lA ESCUElA...
This paper call into question the decision of the Argentine Supreme Court in the case "Castillo y otros c. la Provincia de Salta" on religious education in public school. The supreme court declared the unconstitutionality of the provincial education law which established that religious edu...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo publishedVersion |
| Lenguaje: | Español |
| Publicado: |
Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Derecho. Departamento de Publicaciones
2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=juridica&cl=CL1&d=HWA_3852 https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/collect/juridica/index/assoc/HWA_3852.dir/3852.PDF |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | This paper call into question the decision of the Argentine Supreme Court in the case "Castillo y otros c. la Provincia de Salta" on religious education in public school. The supreme court declared the unconstitutionality of the provincial education law which established that religious education was part of the curricula, that it should be taught within the class schedules and that its content and teachers qualification required the endorsement of the religious authority. It also invalidated a provincial provision requiring parents to state whether they wanted their children to received religious education and, if so, what belief they wanted them to be educated. This work affirms that the Supreme Court used incorrect arguments to based its decision. First, it calls into question the Court's interpretation of Article 2 of the Constitution as it is unaware of the constitutional reform of 1994. Second, it is disputed the fact that the Court has not discussed the right to religious education of children under the terms of the Convention on the Rights of the Child which is part of the Argentine Constitution. Therefore, it is concluded that the limited treatment of those two issues led to the Court, on the one hand, to validate religious teaching in the public school outside school hours and, on the other, to endorse Article 49 of the provincial Constitution -that established that parents have the right to have their children receive religious education in public school that is in accordance with its own convictions-, in flagrant violation of the National Constitution. |
|---|