The Constitutional Council has partially censored the Molac law

French Constitutional Council and so-called "regional" languages:

a decision that straddles the fence

Seized by sixty-one French deputies, several of whom were fooled by the 'national' education minister Jean-Michel Blanquer, the Constitutional Council has partially censored the Molac law.

The appeal concerned Article 6, clarifying the compulsory nature of the 'communal flat contribution' by which municipalities without schools teaching the regional language or in this language must contribute to the operating expenses of schools located on the territory of other municipalities, offering such teaching.

 The claimants claimed that the Constitutional Council's "constant jurisprudence" affirmed the "optional" nature of the participation of territorial authorities in the financing of language teaching. The Constitutional Council confirmed its actual jurisprudence and validated the compulsory nature of the communal flat contribution.

On the other hand, the Constitutional Council censored two articles of the Molac law, articles 4 and 9, based on its interpretation of the first paragraph of Article 2 of the Constitution: "The language of the Republic shall be French". 

Article 4 introduced into the Education Code a recognition of immersive teaching, which according to the Council would force users to use the regional language. Its censorship shows a great misunderstanding of what immersive teaching is. For families, communication in French is always offered. For the pupils, it is a denial of a teaching method that is widely recognised and used throughout the world, including for immersive teaching in French.

The censorship of Article 9 prohibits "anti-French" diacritical marks in civil registration: it will no longer be possible to declare "Cristòu" as a first name.

On these two points, the Constitutional Council took up the 'decree of linguistic terror' of 2 Thermidor of year II (20 July 1794), suspended shortly afterwards but reactivated by Napoleon Bonaparte in the decree of 24 Prairial of year XI (13 June 1803), still in force.

As the Constitutional Council is the ultimate instance of appeal at the level of the French state, there’s the possibility of an appeal filed to the European Court of Human Rights.

Article 8, which deals with signage, is not censored. The town hall of Saint-Christophe, which will have to refuse to register "Cristòu" in the civil registration service, will be able to put up "Sant Cristòu" signs!

Article 7, despite fears, was not censored. It nevertheless states that "the regional language is a subject taught as part of the normal timetable in nursery and elementary schools, junior secondary schools and lycées [...] with the aim of offering the teaching of the regional language to all pupils".

Article 10 was not censored either. It asks the government to submit an annual report to Parliament on "educational establishments of associations developing a pedagogy based on the immersive use of the regional language", which suggests that this pedagogy is only forbidden for public education.

The MP who initiated this law, Paul Molac, proposes to revise the constitution, a difficult objective to achieve.

In the immediate future, the Occitan Nation Party calls for participation in the rallies organised throughout Occitania on Saturday 29 May by Pour que vivent nos langues  (For our languages to live on) to protest against the mutilation of the Molac law and to demand the implementation of a real linguistic diversity in the French Republic.

But the Occitan Nation Party believes that the best solution for our language and our nation to have a normal existence is the independence of Occitania.