Constitutional Court declares "conformity" of the Law on the Career, Function and Remuneration Plan for Teaching Staff

“A big win for teachers” - this is how the Prime Minister reacted to the press this morning on the island of Sal, when asked by the press about the Constitutional Court's (TC) decision that declared the PCFR Law on the Teaching Staff Statute to be fully compliant.

Yesterday, on his social media page, the Prime Minister wrote the following:

“There is no unconstitutionality in the Teachers' PCFR law

As is well known, the President of the Republic has applied to the Constitutional Court (TC) for a preventive review of the constitutionality of certain provisions of the National Assembly's legislative act that approved the Careers, Functions and Remuneration Plan (PCFR) and the Teaching Staff Statute.

This request to the Constitutional Court follows the political veto by the President of the Republic and the subsequent approval of the law by the National Assembly, on a proposal from the government.

The President of the Republic ruled that Article 6(6), Article 9(6) and Article 20(2) of the Law approving the Career, Function and Remuneration Plan and establishing the Statute for Teaching Staff were unconstitutional.

In the view of the President of the Republic, these rules, by giving different treatment to teachers with a degree compared to teachers without a degree, and to teachers in active service compared to teachers in elective, political, managerial or special posts, offended against the principle of equality enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic. The President of the Republic also considered that Article 20(2) of the law violated the principle of the exclusivity of the government's competence in regulatory matters.

However, the government, as is also public, maintained from the outset that there was no trace of unconstitutionality; that both the legislative act itself, as well as the PCFR and the Teaching Staff Statute, scrupulously respected constitutional principles.

In the same vein, the ECA expressly noted that the President of the Republic had not provided sufficient motivation in his request for an assessment of constitutionality.

With regard to the alleged violation of the principle of equality, the ECJ was categorical: “it follows that the PCFR law for teaching staff does not violate the principle of equality and the right not to be disadvantaged in one's position, career, employment or public or private activity, or in the social benefits to which one is entitled, because of holding public office or exercising one's constitutionally provided political rights.”.

In fact, it is firm case law of the European Court of Justice that differentiated treatment does not mean a violation of the principle of equality, since this occurs when the difference in treatment has no rationally understandable motivation, when the differentiated treatment amounts to pure discrimination. Now, the government's proposal treated differently what was different and for this it had an understandable motivation: the qualification of teaching and the valorisation of the teaching function.

For this reason, the ECJ declared that “there is no evidence of constitutionally intolerable unequal treatment that could justify a judgement of censure through a pronouncement that the rule in question is unconstitutional when confronted with the right to equality”.

The TC also decided not to issue a ruling of unconstitutionality regarding the provision of the National Assembly's act for allegedly violating the principle of the exclusivity of the government's regulatory powers.

The President of the Republic made use of the power conferred on him by the Constitution to call for a preventive appraisal by means of an opinion from the Court of First Instance.

The TC's response was clear and assertive, declaring that the PCFR Law and the Teaching Staff Statute were fully in line with the Constitution of the Republic, giving full reason to the arguments put forward by the government over the last few months.

Fortunately, teachers will have the PCFR and their Statute, with clear advantages in terms of pay and career.

Meanwhile, the Teachers“ Union (Siprofis) welcomed this Friday's decision by the Constitutional Court in a press release "stating that “all doubts and questions raised by His Excellency, the President of the Republic, and other stakeholders are definitively removed, ensuring that the statute fully respects the Constitution”.

“After months of uncertainty, anxiety and challenges faced by the teaching profession, this decision represents a historic victory for education, justice and truth. Siprofis recognises and praises the role of the Constitutional Court, parliamentarians and the Ministry of Education in guaranteeing teachers” rights and defending legality," reads the note.

“Siprofis and Fecap [Cape Verdean Teachers” Federation] reaffirm their commitment to the intransigent defence of teachers' rights, basing their actions on coherence, responsibility and impartiality, always putting the will of the teaching profession first," they say.

The post Constitutional Court declares "conformity" of the Law on the Career, Function and Remuneration Plan for Teaching Staff appeared first on Government of Cape Verde.