The Catholic Church will have to find a new criterion to replace the religious one in the allocation of its 50% reserved seats. Government has suggested a social criterion. But will the Church agree? It is facing, in fact, quite a dilemma. On the one hand, a strong current is in favour of the preferential option for the poor; on the other, most catholic schools are considered as star schools reputed for training the elite of the country. So far, there has been no official response.

However, heated debates within the Church and misunderstandings culminated in the outburst of the Bishop of Port-Louis, Mgr Maurice Piat, at the end of the mass commemorating the 169th anniversary of the Abolition of Slavery in Bel-Air. He accused government of ?betraying? the Church at the Privy Council after the latter had returned a verdict saying the religious criterion used in allocating the 50% reserved seats in catholic schools was ?unconstitutional?.

Discriminatory criterion

The response from government was immediate. ?We have been shocked by the tone and behaviour of Mgr Piat.? Prime Minister, Paul Bérenger, called a press conference where he explained government?s position. The PM renewed the suggestion of a social criterion in favour of underprivileged children. The Privy Council?s written judgment makes it clear that the religious criterion is considered ?discriminatory? because the Church could not prove its preference was legitimate. ?To differentiate is not necessarily to discriminate?, and ?the difference of treatment will be justified when it pursues a legitimate aim?, had stated the Supreme Court in two previous affairs.

The fear of catholic schools losing their specificity is not justified, as they keep their right to allocate their 50 % reserved seats. But the Church is not altogether wrong in saying that government had let them down. Catholic schools were asked to join the reform by government. They even started investing in extension works. The Supreme Court judgment and the dismissal of their appeal by the Privy Council dashed their hopes and this explains their ill-feeling.

Government grants to schools are made from public funds, which cannot be used for a small group only, the Privy Council judgment states: ?All government schools and all schools in receipt of a regular grant-in-aid from public funds shall be open to pupils of any race or religion.? Moreover, the issue involved less than 100 pupils last year. The concern is certainly important but such settling of scores might be disproportionate.

The PM said he is not going to engage in controversy with Mgr Piat and denied that government had betrayed the Church. Government is unanimous that ?it is out of the question that the religious criterion remains as it is unconstitutional?. This was confirmed by Françoise Labelle, MP of the majority. Even if she says she has not been shocked by the Bishop?s speech, she admits that the social criterion would be much more profitable to everybody. Deputy Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth also described the Bishop?s outburst as ?dangerous?.

The Bishop blamed government?s lawyers who said that the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the State and the Church was ?null, void and illegal?. The PM replied that Lord Lester had suggested that, ?if the appeal is dismissed, it may be appropriate for subsequent years for a new Memorandum of Understanding to be made between appellants and government.?

Mgr Piat also expressed his discontent over government?s delay in reacting to Tengur?s accusing catholic schools of ?swindling public funds?. Once more, the PM explained that as soon as the catholic authorities took action, government had confirmed the version of the Church and had denounced Tengur?s nasty approach.

Necessary partnership

Despite the public outburst of the Bishop, the PM said government was looking forward to working with catholic authorities again. It seems government is throwing the Church a line and a face-saving device. Government acknowledges the very high level of education in Catholic schools and it is not in its interest to end the partnership.

Bureau of Catholic Education Director, Father Hervé de St Pern, has taken a pragmatic stand: ?State and Church are condemned to work together to serve the Mauritian child.? He confirmed that the Church is open to all suggestions. Considering the small number of children concerned by the religious criterion and the fact that it keeps the privilege of allocating its 50% reserved seats, the Church may only be fighting on a question of principle.

Moreover, the social criterion would benefit more children ? and particularly those who really need it. There is a strong current in the Church wanting to head in that direction and leave the task of educating the elite to the State. After all, both Church and government say they want to work for the interest of the Mauritian child, don?t they?