A/HRC/23/35 needs of individuals belonging to disadvantaged or marginalized groups, including those living in poverty. This may be suitable in cases of longstanding or historical and persisting forms of discrimination. 78 Thus, a recent decision by the Supreme Court of Brazil on 26 April 2012 ruled in favour of racial quotas in universities for black, mixed race (metis) and indigenous students. 79 Article 208 § VII of the Federal Constitution of Brazil relates to the duty of the State for assistance to elementary school students through supplemental programmes of school books, educational supplies, transportation, food and health assistance. 69. States have an obligation to undertake promotional measures, including through the introduction of schemes of financial support for the right to education. Article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights provides for “an adequate fellowship system” among its provisions on the right to education. Similarly, UNESCO’s Convention against Discrimination in Education lays down the criteria of “merit or need” with respect to “grant of scholarships or other forms of assistance to pupils”. 70. Promotional measures have special importance for ensuring the right to education of those who remain deprived of it on account of poverty, in particular extreme poverty. The adoption of the Declaration on the Rule of Law by the United Nations General Assembly, already mentioned, is a landmark in upholding the rights – including the right to education – of the poor to seek justice and get their right to education enforced. 71. A protective and promotional approach also underlies the United States state courts, which have dealt extensively with challenges to government funding of public education in the light of local constitutional provisions recognizing the right to education. Issues involved related to State budgetary allocations as being discriminatory by failing either to provide equal funding to different educational districts (equity claims), or to provide sufficient funding to ensure minimum quality standards in education (adequacy claims). The bulk of funding of basic public education coming from municipal or district taxes resulted in a disparity of resources between poor and rich counties or districts. 80 Unequal distribution of resources made the poorest population of the poorest district bear either a higher cost for the same quality of education, or suffer a worse quality of education. The courts, therefore, ordered the State legislatures to redesign budgetary allocations and to fund public education by redistributing State resources, rather than relying on municipal or district funding, in order to meet equality standards in education. 81 X. Justiciability of the right to education and indicators 72. Courts can better adjudicate claims based on violations of the right to education if litigants formulate clear demands. Human rights indicators and qualitative and quantitative information about education systems can support claims 78 79 80 81 18 The Constitutional Court of South Africa held that “affirmative action in education, which would give preference to previously disadvantaged persons to gain admission (to university), is sanctioned by section 9(2) of the Constitution.” Motala and Another v. University of Natal, 1995 (3) BCLR 374 (D) Nina Ranieri, “Affaires problématiques dans le domaine du droit à l’éducation au Brésil : les quotas raciaux”, Analele Universitatii din Bucuresti, Seria Drept, 2010, III, p. 3/13. Cited in “Courts and the Legal Enforcement of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Comparative experiences of justiciability”, International Commission of Jurists, Geneva, 2008. p. 58 Ibid.