Ana's Case_vcm

References:
• Republic Act No. 9155, August 11, 2001 (Governance of Basic Education Act)
• DepEd Order No. 031, series of 2022
• 1987 Philippine Constitution
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article 26
• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR),
Articles 13 and 14
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Article 28
1. Recognized universally is the principle that education is a fundamental human

right, indispensable for the full realization of human dignity and the development
of societies. In the Philippine context, the 1987 Constitution declares under
Section 1, Article XIV, that "the State shall protect and promote the right of all
citizens to quality education at all levels and shall take appropriate steps to make
such education accessible to all." This provision guarantees equitable access to
education for every Filipino, irrespective of their socio-economic status. Further,
Section 2(2) emphasizes the need for free public education in the elementary
and high school levels, reinforcing the State’s duty to remove barriers that may
hinder the enjoyment of this fundamental right.
In the specific case of Ana, her exclusion from extracurricular activities due to her
inability to pay additional fees is a direct violation of her constitutional right to
education. Public education, as governed by Republic Act No. 9155, mandates
that education must be free of charge and inclusive, ensuring equal opportunities
for all learners, especially those from marginalized backgrounds. Extracurricular
activities form an integral part of the educational system as recognized under
DepEd policies, contributing significantly to holistic development. Denying Ana
access to these activities based solely on her inability to pay additional fees
creates an unjustifiable disparity, undermining the principle of equity enshrined in
the law.
2. The State’s responsibility to provide free and accessible education is further

reinforced by DepEd Order No. 031, series of 2022, which explicitly prohibits the
collection of mandatory fees or contributions that could hinder learners from
participating in educational activities. Such policies are reflective of the
government’s commitment to ensuring that no student is excluded from
educational opportunities due to economic barriers. The public school’s
imposition of additional fees for extracurricular activities, leading to Ana’s
exclusion, violates these directives. It perpetuates systemic discrimination
against low-income families and contradicts the DepEd’s mandate to promote
inclusive education.
3. In international law, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article

26, proclaims that "Everyone has the right to education," underscoring that
education should be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. The
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), in
Articles 13 and 14, obligates State Parties, including the Philippines, to ensure
the right to free primary education and to take steps towards making secondary
and higher education accessible to all. The Convention on the Rights of the Child
(CRC), Article 28, further reinforces this right by requiring States to make
education available and accessible to every child without discrimination.
Ana’s case implicates broader international human rights commitments, such as

the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International
Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), both of which the
Philippines has ratified. Article 13 of the ICESCR obligates State Parties to
provide free and compulsory primary education and progressively free secondary
education. While Ana’s school provides free tuition as part of its public mandate,
the imposition of fees for extracurricular participation violates the broader
mandate to make education fully accessible and non-discriminatory.
The exclusion of Ana from extracurricular activities due to her inability to pay
additional fees constitutes indirect discrimination against her as a learner from a
low-income family. This act violates not only her right to education but also her
dignity as a child. It perpetuates inequality, contrary to the principles of inclusivity
and non-discrimination enshrined in both domestic and international law. The
CRC explicitly states that every child has the right to education on the basis of
equal opportunity. By imposing financial barriers, the school violates this principle
and undermines Ana’s holistic development.
The imposition of additional fees for extracurricular activities disregards the

State’s obligation under the ICESCR to progressively realize the right to
education for all. Such fees create economic barriers that disproportionately
affect marginalized groups, contravening the principle of non-discrimination. The
CRC, in its General Comment No. 1, emphasizes that the realization of the right
to education includes the elimination of financial obstacles that hinder children
from fully participating in the educational system.
4. Ana’s exclusion from extracurricular activities is not merely a logistical issue but
an affront to the principle of social justice as mandated under Article XIII, Section
1 of the 1987 Constitution. The Constitution compels the State to ensure that
vulnerable sectors of society, including economically disadvantaged students like
Ana, are protected from systemic inequalities. Education is one of the key
sectors where such protections must be implemented effectively to prevent
perpetuating cycles of poverty and exclusion.
5. Public education must not only provide academic learning but also holistic
development opportunities, including participation in extracurricular activities.
These activities are integral to the development of social, leadership, and
collaborative skills. By excluding Ana from such activities, the school is depriving
her of essential developmental experiences that are critical for her future
opportunities and growth. Such actions undermine the constitutional guarantee
under Section 13, Article II, which declares that "the State recognizes the vital
role of the youth in nation-building and shall promote and protect their physical,
moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being."
The collective impact of Ana’s exclusion goes beyond her personal experience. It
creates a precedent that normalizes economic discrimination within the public
education system. If such practices are not addressed, they risk eroding public
trust in the State’s ability to uphold the constitutional mandate of accessible and
inclusive education for all.
Maria’s plea on behalf of her daughter, Ana, seeks to reaffirm the inviolability of
the right to education and to address systemic practices that perpetuate
inequality. By upholding Ana’s right to participate in extracurricular activities
without financial barriers, the State and its institutions can demonstrate their
commitment to social justice, equity, and the empowerment of all learners,
irrespective of economic status.
To rectify this injustice, the school must waive the additional fees and allow Ana
to participate in all school activities without discrimination. Further, the
Department of Education should strengthen its monitoring mechanisms to ensure
compliance with policies prohibiting unauthorized fees. The State must also
allocate adequate resources to public schools to fund extracurricular activities,
thereby eliminating the need for additional fees and promoting equitable access
to quality education.
Prayer for Relief
In light of the foregoing, we respectfully urge this Honorable Court to:

1. Declare the imposition of additional fees for extracurricular activities unlawful
when such fees exclude students from participation due to financial incapacity.
2. Direct the school to immediately reinstate Ana’s access to extracurricular
activities and cease any discriminatory practices.
3. Mandate the Department of Education to ensure strict compliance with Republic
Act No. 9155, DepEd Order No. 031, series of 2022, and the constitutional
provisions on inclusive education.

Ana's Case_vcm

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ana's Case_vcm

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ana's Case_vcm

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

References:

1. Recognized universally is the principle that education is a fundamental human

2. The State’s responsibility to provide free and accessible education is further

3. In international law, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article

Ana’s case implicates broader international human rights commitments, such as

The imposition of additional fees for extracurricular activities disregards the

Prayer for Relief

In light of the foregoing, we respectfully urge this Honorable Court to:

You might also like