Discrimination against Catholic children was “baked into” a £20m scheme for tackling educational underachievement in Northern Ireland, the Court of Appeal heard today.
Senior judges were told selection methodology in the RAISE programme involves fundamental flaws which are unfair to pupils from Belfast and Derry.
Introduced by Education Minister Paul Givan in 2024 and partially financed by the Irish Government, the initiative is aimed at reducing underachievement and disadvantage.
More than 400 schools in 15 areas across Northern Ireland were identified as potentially eligible for funding.
In December last year the High Court dismissed a challenge to how the Department of Education operated the RAISE programme.
At that stage a judge ruled that scheme does not directly discriminate against Catholics.
Lawyers for a number of children are now seeking to overturn the verdict, insisting geography and religion were allowed to trump objective need.
Karen Quinlivan KC argued the Department had deliberately prioritised balancing out the perceived political backgrounds.
It was also claimed that the two city areas were wrongly ranked lower, despite knowing it would have a greater impact on Catholic pupils.
“The Northern Ireland approach, which meant downgrading Belfast and Derry, coupled with the approach of achieving a balance, meant discrimination was baked into the scheme,” the barrister submitted.
Legal challenges are being mounted by one pupil at a primary school in Belfast and another attending a secondary school in Derry over how the Department identified Specific Output Areas (SOAs) to allocate resources.
A third child at an Irish language primary school in Belfast has also brought a case based on the downgrading of the Free School Meals Entitlement as an indicator of need.
Methodology for allocating funding under the scheme was irrational, discriminatory and in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights, according to their lawyers.
Appeal judges heard the Department and the Minister had allowed irrelevant metrics to outweigh indicators of socio-economically disadvantaged families and communities.
Describing the approach as fundamentally flawed, Ms Quinlivan claimed it was both ethically and legally objectionable.
“A scheme which discriminates on the grounds of religion, gender or race is so inimical to justice and contrary to the rule of law as to be irrational,” the barrister said.
She claimed the situation was further aggravated by amending the scheme to elevate GCSE attainment above other criteria.
Departmental officials also took it upon themselves to add output areas in north Belfast which apparently did not meet the requirements.
“What happened brings us truly into Alice in Wonderland territory,” Ms Quinlivan added.
“The outworking of the entire methodology was demonstrably unfair on north Belfast.”
The appeal continues.