Educational differentiation examined through constitutional interpretation and regional practices: critical and prospective developments

Abstract

Constitutional Court judgment No. 192/2024 marked a turning point in the debate on differentiated regional autonomy, compelling a critical reflection on the compatibility between the devolution of competences and the safeguarding of fundamental rights. Education, situated at the intersection of national uniformity requirements and regional aspirations, emerges as a paradigmatic field: on the one hand, the Court reaffirmed the existence of a “hard core” of State competences, which remain insusceptible to differentiation; on the other hand, it left open the possibility of transferring specific functions, provided that such transfers are subordinated to the definition of Essential Levels of Performance (LEP) and remain consistent with the principles of solidarity and substantive equality. By analyzing the internal dimensions of the right to education, the distinction between “general rules on education” and “education,” as well as the draft agreements advanced by Veneto, Lombardy, and Emilia-Romagna, in light of the current normative and interpretative framework, the article seeks to identify what is genuinely differentiable in this domain, highlighting its many uncertainties and few certainties. The perspective adopted is that of a differentiated regionalism grounded in the State of Persons, a model admissible only insofar as it serves the maximization of citizens’ rights to education.