The Erasmus+ EduLAw Project for Strengthening Rights-based Education


  • Gracienne Lauwers Free University of Brussels, Belgium



EduLAw (ELA) project, law modules for teacher training programs, autonomy of schools, rights-based decision making in education


The purpose of the article is to explore the relevance of the EduLAw (ELA) project on law modules for teacher training courses, illustrated in the case study of the legal developments in the Flemish Community of Belgium. The article analyses this issue by addressing two key points: firstly, it explains the background and relevance of the EduLAw project and recent European developments; secondly it illustrates how policymakers of the Flemish Community of Belgium have responded through public law to demands for stricter review of decisions about individual pupils of teachers, school principals and school boards on issues such as discipline and special needs requests. A short description of the relevant characteristics of the education system in the Flemish Community of Belgium, is followed by an examination of two 2014 decrees on education and their innovative response to demands for more transparency and legal certainty in rights-based decision making about pupils by teachers, school officials and school boards. The analyses reveal that educational reforms are increasingly linked with the political cause of equality (Groof, Fussel, & Lauwers, 2008, p. 223) and transparency in decision making of administrations, including school officials, especially decisions affecting the rights of individual pupils in education. Public law is thereby used to build in constraints as to how school autonomy and discretion of teachers, school officials and school boards should be exercised. The analyses also reveal the link between substantive requirements of good decision-making and procedural requirements. Procedural obligations in their turn opened the way for more substantive control by the court in disciplinary procedures, and enrolment of pupils with special education needs. The article concludes that, although schools still have autonomy to fashion their own school regulations , it is clear that the two decrees have, through procedural requirements and substantive principles of administrative legality, intruded into this area. Thus, these changed circumstances require teachers, school principals and school boards to be trained in rights-based decision making. This is what the EduLAw is trying to accomplish.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Gracienne Lauwers, Free University of Brussels, Belgium

    Professor at the Free University of Brussels (BE), Vytautas Magnus University (LT), University of Trento (IT), coordinating grant holder of the project ERASMUS+ Application (573540-EPP-1-2016-1-BE-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP.


Besluit van de Vlaamse Regering houdende de codificatie betreffende het secundair onderwijs [Codex Secondary Education] (2010). B.S.24/06/2011. Retrieved from

Craane, T. (2015). Het M-decreet onder de loep genomen (Master thesis). Universiteit Antwerpen.

De Vroey, A. (2016). Inclusive practices and co-support in Flemish secondary schools. A qualitative study on inclusive school development (Doctoral thesis). University of Leuven.

Decreet betreffende maatregelen voor leerlingen met specifieke onderwijsbehoeften (2014). B.S.28/08/2014.

Decreet houdende diverse maatregelen betreffende de rechtspositie van leerlingen in het basis- en secundair onderwijs en betreffende de participatie op school (2014). B.S.20/08/2014.

Deschacht, B. (2015). Onderzoek: inclusief onderwijs en M - decreet: realisatie bij leerkrachten.

European Commission. (n.d.). Education and Training Monitor 2016 Belgium. Retrieved from les/monitor2016-be_en.pdf

European Parliament v. Council, C-540/03 (2006). ECLI:EU:C:2006:429.

Flemish Children’s Rights Commissioner’s Office. (2015). Report on children’s rights for specific groups in Flanders (pp. 1–15). Brussels. Retrieved from

General comment No. 9 (2006): The rights of children with disabilities (2007). CRC/C/GC/9. Retrieved from

Groof, J. D. (1983). Recht op en vrijheid van onderwijs. CEPESS.

Groof, J. D., Fussel, H.-P., & Lauwers, G. (Eds.). (2008). Inequality in Education. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers.

Groof, J. D., & Lauwers, G. (Eds.). (2003). Special Education: Yearbook of the European Association for Education Law and Policy. Springer Netherlands. Retrieved from //

Heubert, J. (1997). The More We Get Together: Improving Collaboration between Educators and Their Lawyers. Harvard Educational Review, 67(3), 531–583.

Lauwers, G. (2006). De bewijslast in het geval van segregatie in het onderwijs volgens het Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens. Tijdschrift voor onderwijsrecht en onderwijsbeleid, (3), 143–152.

Lauwers, G. (2012). Deel 2 van het advies op de Implementatie van het VN-verdrag voor personen met een handicap: advies Steunpunt Recht en Onderwijs. In opdracht van het Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap.

M-Decree for special education needs children. (n.d.). Retrieved July 12, 2017, from

Ministry of Education (of the Flemish Community of Belgium). (2017). Interim metaevaluation of the M-decree. Retrieved from

Rights of the child. (n.d.). Retrieved July 12, 2017, from

Statistisch jaarboek van het Vlaams onderwijs schooljaar 2013-2014. (2015). Retrieved from

Van der Spiegel, R. (2016). De rol en positie van ouders binnen incusief onderwijs voor de invoering van het M-decreet (Master thesis). Universiteit Antwerpen.

Van segregatie naar inclusie [From segregation to inclusion]. (n.d.). Retrieved July 12, 2017, from /nl/grote-lijnen-van-het-m-decreet







How to Cite

The Erasmus+ EduLAw Project for Strengthening Rights-based Education. (2017). Eastern European Journal of Transnational Relations, 1(1), 19-29.