The Constitutional Court released on Friday the motivation on the decision to declare the government's decision to take responsibility on the law on education as unconstitutional due to a judicial conflict between the Parliament and the government. At the time, the law was already being debated in the Parliament.

The motivation however, does not bring about the long awaited answer on whether the government should continue to cease procedure to take responsibility on the law. The court reads that the government's decision to take responsibility was not motivated since the law was under debate in the parliament.

The Court reads that it cannot find any reasons why the government initated the procedure in the first place, since there is no urgency in the implementation of the law on education since many of the measures in the draft law will be implemented starting with the new school year in September 2011 and others in 2012.

Moreover, the Court reads that the government did not include an urgency request to the Senate at the time when the government forwarded the law on education and therefore the government cannot sustain that the debate on the law was delayed extensively.

The motivation reads that there is no proof of a blockage or of inactivity in the Parliamentary activity regarding the law on education. The Constitutional Court released on Friday the motivation on the decision to declare the government's decision to take responsibility on the law on education as unconstitutional due to a judicial conflict between the Parliament and the government. At the time, the law was already being debated in the Parliament.

The motivation however, does not bring about the long awaited answer on whether the government should continue to cease procedure to take responsibility on the law. The court reads that the g