The Constitutional Court (TC) has unanimously agreed to guard the director of a department situated in Madrid of the Chaabi du Maroc financial institution, who was fired in 2017 for demonstrating in protection of the residents of the Rif Valley.
The sentence has specified that the dismissal of the person violated his proper to ideological freedom, in reference to the rights to freedom of expression and meeting.
The magistrates have harassed to disclaim the concurrence of this dismissal, that the interference of the employer within the elementary rights of the employee should be “the strictly important for the achievement of reliable enterprise pursuits”,
In this manner, the Constitutional Court has annulled the choice of the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM), which had eliminated the rationale for the director, after being supported by a Social Court of Madrid.
So, the rationale argued by the financial institution and endorsed by the TSJM was “the transgression of contractual good religion and breach of belief” by the director, by publishing on social networks “pictures taken in his workplace with superimposed political messages” .
Fired for ideological causes
However, the TC considers affordable the suspicion that the actual motive for the dismissal was “the train of his proper to have the ability to freely specific his ideology in protection of the rights of the residents of the Rif, opposite to that of his employer.”
Among different issues, the TC states that this alleged misuse of the financial institution’s picture was found in the middle of the investigation and in addition values that one other worker was fired instantly after collaborating within the aforementioned demonstration.
In addition, the courtroom of ensures emphasizes that “the defendant financial institution didn’t adjust to the burden of proof that weighed on it, by not demonstrating that the actual causes for its resolution had been unrelated to the discriminatory motive denounced.”
The magistrates recall the constitutional doctrine that establishes the necessity to protect “the stability between the employee’s obligations arising from the employment contract and the scope of his constitutional rights and freedoms.”
“Given the pre-eminent place of those within the authorized system, the modulation that the employment contract can produce in its train should be strictly important for the achievement of reliable enterprise pursuits, and proportional and sufficient to the achievement of mentioned objective” , says the TC.
In non-public colleges, it should be clearly justified
The courtroom explains that ideological freedom “could endure restrictions when the employee supplies providers in corporations with an ideological tendency, as within the case of personal instructional facilities which have an outlined ideology.”
In this sense, it recollects that “when a educating exercise is carried out that’s hostile or opposite to the ideology of a educating middle, the dismissal of the employee accused of such conduct could also be justified, if the open or covert assault on that ideology is confirmed.”
“But, even in such instances during which enterprise interference within the enjoyment of the best could also be justified, this can’t be limitless, for the reason that easy disagreement of a employee with respect to such ideology can’t be trigger for dismissal, if it isn’t has been externalized or manifested in a few of the instructional actions of the middle”, he clarifies.
For all these causes, it understands that the choice of the TSJM “didn’t adjust to the necessities of the constitutional doctrine on the distribution of the burden of proof within the instances during which it’s invoked.”
Topics