EURSC Reform


In a recent response to a parliamentary question, Mr Šefčovič admits that there were problems with the Maths and Chemistry Baccalaureate 2012. Unfortunately Mr Šefčovič did not respond to the MEP’s request for information on what right of redress there might be for impacted pupils, instead he merely points out that the Commission will follow up on recommendations to avoid the problem recurring. He doesn’t say what those recommendations are.

Mr Šefčovič said “Concerning European Baccalaureate 2012 exams, the Commission regrets the problems encountered at the mathematics and chemistry exams. The Commission requested a detailed report from the Office of the Secretary-General of the European Schools which was prepared by independent external experts. A number of recommendations were made that will be followed-up closely in order to avoid similar problems in the future.”

Unfortunately it is arguable that Mr Šefčovič has now mislead Parliament, and his response is factually inaccurate. The “detailed report” referenced in his answer was, as a matter of fact, not prepared following a request by the Commission, as Mr Šefčovič states. It was one carried out by EURSC on their own initiative prior to the Commission becoming aware of the problem. It was not independent, it was conducted by the person in charge of BAC 2012 Professor Norbert Pachler and colleagues, and thus, as Professor Norbert Pachler held was the chair of BAC 2012, he had responsibility for the problem occurring in the first place. He clearly cannot in any way be considered independent. The report too did not make recommendations for the future but merely determined that maths marked in BAC 2012 ought to be bumped up to correct the mistakes made. No report was asked for nor received in relation to chemistry.

The cover up continues. Those impacted appear to have no right of redress. Lets see if the EU Ombudsman will act, as the EU Commission continues to disobey her finding of Maladministration, as it disagrees. The EU Ombudsman found that the lack of an independent review of EURSC amounted to maladministration by the Commission. A case continues to run at the EU Ombudsman as a result of the Commission’s refusal to act on the maladministration finding.

Next up, lets see if the ECHR takes up the reins and reviews the denial of fundamental rights.

Author :
Print