Facts
The appellant, a law graduate, took the bar examination in the Canton of Basel-Stadt for the second time in 2004. The Bar Examination Authority of Basel-Stadt informed him on November 9, 2004 that he would not be admitted to the oral examinations, as both his two-week take-home assignment and the second written examination had been assessed as insufficient.
The appellant filed a constitutional appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, requesting that the decision be overturned and that the lower instance be instructed to admit him to the oral examinations or to grant him a cantonal legal remedy. He alleged a violation of Art. 6 para. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), as no cantonal legal remedy was available to him. Regarding the take-home assignment, he claimed arbitrariness in the assessment, violation of the principle of equality, lack of a legal basis or delegation norm in the Attorneys Act, and disproportionality.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the constitutional appeal, to the extent that it was admissible. It stated that Art. 6 para. 1 ECHR is generally not applicable to examination decisions, unless they concern the permission or refusal to practice a particular profession. Rather, examination decisions relate to the assessment of the knowledge and experience required for the practice of a profession, which is excluded from the scope of the Convention.
With regard to the assessment of the take-home…