Comments to the UN Forum on Minority Issues: [Draft] Recommendations on Minorities and the Right to Education Comments by Adalah Attorney Sawsan Zaher 15-16 December 2008 Adalah would like to present its comments to the Draft Recommendations as follows: Section III – Access to education for Minorities, in Particular Women and Girls In general, the subject of budgets receives little attention in the draft recommendations. This lack of emphasis contrasts sharply with the crucial nature of budgetary allocation in respecting, protecting and fulfilling the educational rights of minorities. Further, the language contained in this draft concerning the issue of budgets is weaker overall than the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and its General Comment 13 on the right to education as detailed in our following comments: 1) "The costing of educational policies should proceed accurately as possible on the basis of holistic appraisals of minority needs" The language of this provision is insufficient. The “costing” of educational policies should not be calculated according to needs only, but also on the basis of the principle of equal treatment, and in a manner that will ensure that education is readily accessible for all. Equal treatment could entail the allocation of resources for advancing the right to education among minority groups that have been victims of historical injustices committed against them or discrimination in realizing the right to education. This critique should be seen within the context of the obligation stipulated by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) for State Parties to take immediate steps to provide primary education (and General Comment 14 of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) on a non-discriminatory basis. In the drafting of budgets for education in the case of minorities, clear criteria are required that are tailored to the special needs of the minority group. For example, in a case litigated before the Supreme Court of Israel, Adalah challenged a long-standing governmental socio-economic plan that classifies select towns and villages in Israel as “National Priority Areas” (NPAs) in the field of education. Towns and villages classified as NPAs receive these lucrative educational benefits designed the support the development of these communities. As Adalah argued the government’s decision arbitrarily and discriminatorily excluded the vast majority of Arab towns and villages in Israel; while over 535 Jewish towns received these benefits, only four Arab villages were eligible. Adalah demanded the setting of clear, objective and transparent criteria for the allocation of these educational benefits. If socio-economic need was the basis of the program, than almost all Arab towns and villages would qualify. In February 2006, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment canceling the governmental decision on the grounds that it discriminates against Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel on the basis of nationality. The State, however, has been foot-dragging and thus far has refused to implement the Court’s decision claiming a lack of financial resources. The cost