**The Constitutional Court sees no objection to 65 per cent of the places in Dutch-speaking schools in Brussels being reserved for Dutch-speakers. It does, however, annul the rule that pupils who have already attended school for nine years in Dutch-speaking primary education are also given a priority of 15 per cent of places in secondary education.**
This was the outcome of a judgment handed down on Thursday, following a claim by the French Community Government and the College of the French Community Commission in Brussels (Cocof).
In January, the Education Committee of the Flemish Parliament gave the green light for the new enrolment rules in mainstream education in Brussels. The decree also reinstated a number of disputed priority rules for Dutch speakers. The priority for Dutch speakers was raised from 55 to 65%. In addition, a new priority group of 15 per cent was introduced in secondary education for pupils who had previously attended Dutch-speaking primary education for nine years.
The Constitutional Court sees no objection to 65 per cent of the places in Dutch-speaking schools in Brussels being reserved for Dutch-speakers because it meets a reasonable need. Moreover, it does not prevent the Flemish community from taking up a fair share of pupils whose home language is neither Dutch nor French. The Court does annul the rule that pupils who have already had nine years of schooling in Dutch-speaking primary education also receive a priority of 15 per cent of places in secondary education.
**Bilingual ketjes**
In a press release, Flemish MP Annabel Tavernier (N-VA) is pleased with the ruling of the Constitutional Court, but criticises Cocof’s attitude. “It is thanks to N-VA that the proportion of priority for Dutch speakers was increased from 55 to 65%. I am of course very pleased that the Constitutional Court has decided that this increase is constitutional,” she says.
“The fact that Cocof wanted to make it impossible for Dutch speakers to find a place in a Flemish school in Brussels defies all imagination. Education in Brussels is a competence of both the French and Flemish Communities. Flanders takes its responsibility and provides bilingual and even trilingual children. The French Community does not. Only 8 percent of French-speaking school-leavers speak a decent word of Dutch. Instead of fighting legal battles, the Cocof would have done better to spend its time on increasing the capacity and quality of its education.”
Flemish Minister Weyts (N-VA) is satisfied with the ruling. “The Constitutional Court rejects the French-speaking objections and confirms the principles of the Flemish priority policy in Brussels. The 15 per cent rule in secondary education can easily be remedied. This is good news for the Flemish people in Brussels and proof that a resolute priority policy is indeed possible – both in Brussels and in the Vlaamse Rand.
**Nine-year requirement too long**
Groen, however, hopes for a thorough adjustment of the 15% rule. “The Constitutional Court stated today that requiring a school career of nine years in Dutch-speaking education is too long. We don’t think that is fair either,” argues Flemish Member of Parliament Stijn Bex. “After all, this means that every child that did not attend Dutch-speaking education from the first year of kindergarten cannot appeal to the priority rule. We therefore propose that all children who have completed the fourth, fifth and sixth years of study in Dutch-speaking primary education can make use of the priority rule and, in so doing, can continue their studies together with their classmates. That is not only fairer: we also believe that the Constitutional Court will have a better chance of approving this proposal.
Flemish parliamentary group leader Hannelore Goeman (Vooruit) is pleased that the Court also judges that the required nine years is too long. “It was certainly a noble idea to give these pupils priority in enrolment. Those who consciously choose Dutch-language education as a non-native should be rewarded for this,” she says.
“But for Vooruit it was clear from the start: nine years is just too long. And now the Constitutional Court agrees with us. As the Court also recognises, this regulation threatens to deny, for example, highly gifted children who get through primary education quicker access to Dutch-language secondary education. Moreover, 15 per cent is a ridiculously small percentage if you know that the vast majority of pupils in the first year in Dutch-speaking secondary education in Brussels come from Dutch-speaking primary education.”
**Flemish decree**
The priority rules were part of the broader Flemish decree that introduced new enrolment rules in order to put an end to long queues at the gates of popular schools. Specifically for Brussels, Flanders raised the priority for Dutch speakers from 55 to 65 percent. These are pupils with at least one parent with a sufficient command of Dutch.
In addition, pupils who had already attended school for nine years in Dutch-speaking primary education would also receive a priority of 15 per cent of places in secondary education. This was not to the liking of the French Community Commission in Brussels (Cocof), which protested with a conflict of interest. As a result, the discussion of the enrolment decree was halted and the new enrolment rules could not be launched as planned.
Consultations between the two communities did not lead to a breakthrough, but because the procedure of the conflict of interests was completely finished, the Flemish Parliament could still approve the decree during the last session of the previous legislature. However, the French Community Government and the College of the French Community Commission in Brussels went to the Constitutional Court against the new priority rules.
Why does the french community/cocof, who manage the french-speaking school, want to stop dutch-speaking schools from giving priority to dutch-speaking students?
Title is a bit misleading, thanks to the N-VA the dutch-speaking priority cohort goes from 55 to 65% and the Court upheld that.
3 comments
**The Constitutional Court sees no objection to 65 per cent of the places in Dutch-speaking schools in Brussels being reserved for Dutch-speakers. It does, however, annul the rule that pupils who have already attended school for nine years in Dutch-speaking primary education are also given a priority of 15 per cent of places in secondary education.**
This was the outcome of a judgment handed down on Thursday, following a claim by the French Community Government and the College of the French Community Commission in Brussels (Cocof).
In January, the Education Committee of the Flemish Parliament gave the green light for the new enrolment rules in mainstream education in Brussels. The decree also reinstated a number of disputed priority rules for Dutch speakers. The priority for Dutch speakers was raised from 55 to 65%. In addition, a new priority group of 15 per cent was introduced in secondary education for pupils who had previously attended Dutch-speaking primary education for nine years.
The Constitutional Court sees no objection to 65 per cent of the places in Dutch-speaking schools in Brussels being reserved for Dutch-speakers because it meets a reasonable need. Moreover, it does not prevent the Flemish community from taking up a fair share of pupils whose home language is neither Dutch nor French. The Court does annul the rule that pupils who have already had nine years of schooling in Dutch-speaking primary education also receive a priority of 15 per cent of places in secondary education.
**Bilingual ketjes**
In a press release, Flemish MP Annabel Tavernier (N-VA) is pleased with the ruling of the Constitutional Court, but criticises Cocof’s attitude. “It is thanks to N-VA that the proportion of priority for Dutch speakers was increased from 55 to 65%. I am of course very pleased that the Constitutional Court has decided that this increase is constitutional,” she says.
“The fact that Cocof wanted to make it impossible for Dutch speakers to find a place in a Flemish school in Brussels defies all imagination. Education in Brussels is a competence of both the French and Flemish Communities. Flanders takes its responsibility and provides bilingual and even trilingual children. The French Community does not. Only 8 percent of French-speaking school-leavers speak a decent word of Dutch. Instead of fighting legal battles, the Cocof would have done better to spend its time on increasing the capacity and quality of its education.”
Flemish Minister Weyts (N-VA) is satisfied with the ruling. “The Constitutional Court rejects the French-speaking objections and confirms the principles of the Flemish priority policy in Brussels. The 15 per cent rule in secondary education can easily be remedied. This is good news for the Flemish people in Brussels and proof that a resolute priority policy is indeed possible – both in Brussels and in the Vlaamse Rand.
**Nine-year requirement too long**
Groen, however, hopes for a thorough adjustment of the 15% rule. “The Constitutional Court stated today that requiring a school career of nine years in Dutch-speaking education is too long. We don’t think that is fair either,” argues Flemish Member of Parliament Stijn Bex. “After all, this means that every child that did not attend Dutch-speaking education from the first year of kindergarten cannot appeal to the priority rule. We therefore propose that all children who have completed the fourth, fifth and sixth years of study in Dutch-speaking primary education can make use of the priority rule and, in so doing, can continue their studies together with their classmates. That is not only fairer: we also believe that the Constitutional Court will have a better chance of approving this proposal.
Flemish parliamentary group leader Hannelore Goeman (Vooruit) is pleased that the Court also judges that the required nine years is too long. “It was certainly a noble idea to give these pupils priority in enrolment. Those who consciously choose Dutch-language education as a non-native should be rewarded for this,” she says.
“But for Vooruit it was clear from the start: nine years is just too long. And now the Constitutional Court agrees with us. As the Court also recognises, this regulation threatens to deny, for example, highly gifted children who get through primary education quicker access to Dutch-language secondary education. Moreover, 15 per cent is a ridiculously small percentage if you know that the vast majority of pupils in the first year in Dutch-speaking secondary education in Brussels come from Dutch-speaking primary education.”
**Flemish decree**
The priority rules were part of the broader Flemish decree that introduced new enrolment rules in order to put an end to long queues at the gates of popular schools. Specifically for Brussels, Flanders raised the priority for Dutch speakers from 55 to 65 percent. These are pupils with at least one parent with a sufficient command of Dutch.
In addition, pupils who had already attended school for nine years in Dutch-speaking primary education would also receive a priority of 15 per cent of places in secondary education. This was not to the liking of the French Community Commission in Brussels (Cocof), which protested with a conflict of interest. As a result, the discussion of the enrolment decree was halted and the new enrolment rules could not be launched as planned.
Consultations between the two communities did not lead to a breakthrough, but because the procedure of the conflict of interests was completely finished, the Flemish Parliament could still approve the decree during the last session of the previous legislature. However, the French Community Government and the College of the French Community Commission in Brussels went to the Constitutional Court against the new priority rules.
Why does the french community/cocof, who manage the french-speaking school, want to stop dutch-speaking schools from giving priority to dutch-speaking students?
Title is a bit misleading, thanks to the N-VA the dutch-speaking priority cohort goes from 55 to 65% and the Court upheld that.