A/HRC/23/35 49. Discriminatory practices against Roma with mental disabilities were found to violate the right to education under the European Co nvention on Human Rights. 49 The European Court of Human Rights held that Roma children must be integrated into mainstream classes; their right to education was violated by the placement of a Croatian national of Roma origin in Roma-only classes rather than ethnically “mixed classes”. 50, In another case referring to schools for Roma children only, the Equal Treatment Authority of Hungary concluded that authorities responsible for the local system that segregated students violated the principle of equal treatme nt. 51 Moreover, adjudication shows how the right to basic education of children living in rural areas can be defended. 50. Jurisprudence based on national legislation can also lead to affirmative action to support the right to education. In South Africa, based on the allegation by the Eastern Cape District School Association that failure by the provincial Government to pay necessary hostel, transport, and boarding subsidies, impaired rural children of the district from attending school, the South African Human Rights Commission found this to be a violation of the rights of affected learners to basic education, and recommended that payments of these subsidies be made. C. Enforcement of the right to quality education 51. Providing education of quality is a responsibility devolving on all providers of education and its justiciability is crucial for upholding quality and standards of education in face of general deterioration of quality and widespread concern with it. Claims for quality education are reinforced by the 2010 Millennium Review Summit, which expressed renewed commitment of the international community “to provide equitable educational and learning opportunities for all children ” and “ensuring quality education and profession through the school system”. 52 52. As regards quality imperatives, the State of New York has interpreted the education clause in the constitution to include high quality education, adjudicating that the Government must provide a “sound basic education” 53, and a “meaningful high school education”. 54 The court found that the teaching quality was inadequate, and that the large class sizes in New York City negatively affected student performance. 55 Though the court considered other factors in holding that the State funding system failed to provide a sound basic education, the issue of teacher quality was clearly seen as justiciable. 53. The right to a quality education carries the obligation for States to ensure that curriculum meets essential objectives of education. In litigation by private colleges and universities in the Philippines, involving a statutorily assigned power to the 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 14 Horvath and Kiss v. Hungary, Application no. 11146/11, January 29, 2013, available at http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-116124, accessed February 24, 2013. Orsus and Others v. Croatia, 16 March 2010. Law No. 23/2007 amending Law No. 26 of 1998 on assuring equal opportunity for disabled people. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 65/1 – “Keeping the promise: united to achieve the Millennium Development Goals” (September 2010). Board of Education, Levittown Union Free Speech District v. Nyquist, 57 N.Y.S.2d 27, 48 (N.Y. 1982). Campaign for Fiscal Equity, Inc. v. State of New York, 801 N.E.2d 326, 332 (N.Y. 2003). See Campaign for Fiscal Equity, 100 N.Y.2d at 912.