The organisation of the argument follows the most recent version
of the right to education, namely Articles 28 and 29 of the
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (UN, 1989) to look at
issues of access to education systems, and the content and values
of education. It then draws, additionally, on the European
Convention of Human Rights (Council of Europe, 1950) and Article
13(3) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights (ICESCR) (UN, 1966) to examine parental rights in
the education of their children.
The framework for the organisation of the argument thus divides
the right to education into three separate rights as an analytical
and heuristic device: access to education systems, the content and
values of education and parental rights. This is not intended to
undermine the legal argument of the late and very sadly missed
Katarina Tomasevski, the 1st United Nations Special Rapporteur on
the Right to Education1, that, in order to focus on the obligations of
the state, the right to education should be viewed through the
prism of four inter-related rights - the famous 4-A model:
availability (of schools and of an education system); accessibility
(economic and geographical); acceptability (quality and values);
and adaptability (to safeguard children’s human rights)
(Tomasevski, 2000, 2003).
As a sociologist engaged in critical policy analysis, my aims are
different. These are, firstly, to explore the tensions in and between
the different elements of the right in order to begin to make sense
1 The office of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education was established in 1998.
Katarina Tomasevski was the first Rapparteur from 1998 until her resignation in 2004. Vernor
Munoz Villalobos has occupied the office since 2004.