CRPD/C/23/D/41/2017
They claimed a violation of the right to education (Constitution, art. 27) in conjunction with
the right to equality (Constitution, art. 14). On 31 March 2014, the Constitutional Court
informed the author that the appeal had been rejected, given the manifest absence of any
violation of a fundamental right covered by amparo.6
2.15 On 14 May 2013, Rubén’s parents filed a second report with the León provincial
prosecution service regarding the discrimination and abuse suffered by Rubén at the school.
This report included new evidence in the form of information reflected in the ruling of the
High Court of Justice of Castile and León, in particular the statements of the mothers of
Rubén’s classmates and the Court’s assertion that “there could even have been some
abnormal functioning” in the school. On 8 October 2013, the prosecution service decided
that the case should remain closed, in line with its previous decision, since it had not found
the actions of the teachers and school staff to constitute “degrading treatment of a habitual
nature or a sufficient intensity, or a specific, malicious intent to harass, denigrate or
humiliate”.7
2.16 On 12 May 2014, the León provincial prosecution service submitted a report to
Court of Investigation No. 3 of León regarding Rubén’s parents’ decision not to take him to
the Nuestra Señora del Sagrado Corazón special education centre, where he was enrolled.
The prosecution service claimed that their actions constituted the criminal offence of
neglect. On 23 May 2014, the Court ordered each defendant to provide a surety of €2,400 to
cover any pecuniary obligations that may ultimately be imposed on them, with a warning
that if they failed to do so, their assets would be seized in sufficient quantity to secure the
amount indicated. On 20 April 2015, Criminal Court No. 1 of León acquitted Rubén’s
parents of the charges of neglect.8
2.17 On 26 September 2014, Rubén’s parents took their case to the European Court of
Human Rights and asked the Court to find a violation of article 14 of the Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human
Rights) and to order the State party to pay the author the sum of €100,000 in compensation
for the personal injury caused. On 13 April 2014, the application was found inadmissible
under articles 34 and 35 of the Convention pursuant to a decision of the Court sitting in
single-judge formation.9
The complaint
3.1
The authors claim that Rubén is the victim of a violation of article 24 of the
Convention, insofar as the administrative decision to enrol him in the Nuestra Señora del
Sagrado Corazón special education centre resulted in a violation of his right to inclusive
education. They claim that the courts of the State party dismissed their request primarily on
the basis of the guidance team’s reports, which were prepared in close cooperation with and
at the behest of the teachers who subjected Rubén to rejection, discrimination, neglect and
abuse, with no respect for his rights or dignity. They also claim that the right of Rubén’s
parents to be an active and respected party to the whole process was violated.
3.2
The authors claim that there has been a violation by the State party of article 23 of
the Convention in relation to the accusation of neglect made by the León provincial
prosecution service against Rubén’s parents. They claim that this could have led to the loss
by Rubén’s parents of their custodial authority. They argue that their right to family life
was violated, since the decisions of the State party’s authorities implied Rubén’s internment
and separation from his parents.
3.3
The authors also claim that Rubén is the victim of a violation of article 7, insofar as
the State party has not taken the necessary measures to ensure his full enjoyment of all
human rights and fundamental freedoms on an equal basis with other children.
6
7
8
9
GE.20-12764
The authors provided a copy of the decision of the Constitutional Court, dated 31 March 2014.
The authors provided a copy of the decision of the León provincial prosecution service, dated 8
October 2013.
The authors provided a copy of the ruling of Criminal Court No. 1 of León, dated 20 April 2015.
The authors provided a copy of the standardized decision of the European Court of Human Rights of
13 November 2014, in which the Court states that their case “does not meet the admissibility criteria
set out in articles 34 and 35 of the Convention”.
5