Latest World News

Charles de Courson and several presidents of parliamentary groups: “A new denial of democracy could only aggravate disaffection for our institutions”


VSWhat is at stake in the National Assembly in recent weeks and days to come is nothing less than the defense of the rights of parliamentarians, the rights of the opposition and therefore, in part, of our democracy.

Gaston Monnerville [1897-1991] was an illustrious president of the Senate because hermetic to the pressures of which he was the target. In 1962, he proclaimed: “It is a fact of experience that, in a republic, when the majority wants to stifle the minorities, a factious spirit develops which is incompatible with democracy. Also, democracies enact constitutional forms which take away from the executive power – and even sometimes from the legislative power – the right to take measures contrary to the nature of free institutions. »

The bill repealing the postponement of the effective retirement age is the subject of all possible maneuvers to prevent the vote of the national representation. The examination of this text in committee, Wednesday, May 31, saw an artifice never used before, the president of the social affairs committee having simply decided that the sub-amendments tabled would not be examined, in defiance of the right of amendment .

Also read the column: Article reserved for our subscribers “The pension reform crisis is not produced by the imbalance of our Constitution, but by its violation”

But that is nothing compared to the script, sewn with white thread, written by the President of the National Assembly, under the dictation of the President of the Republic. According to its recent declarations, the latter is preparing to declare inadmissible the amendments to restore Article 1, which provides for the repeal of the two-year postponement of the retirement age.

Previous dangerous

Doing so and preventing consideration of an amendment restoring a provision of an initial text, the admissibility of which has been recognized twice (by the office of the Assembly and by the chairman of the finance committee) would constitute a precedent unusual and dangerous.

We recall, as Charles de Gaulle said, that a Constitution, “It’s a spirit,
institutions, a practice”.

Also read the column: Article reserved for our subscribers “It is symptomatic that there is no equivalent of Article 49.3 in Germany”

However, if the President of the Assembly is the internal judge of the financial admissibility of amendments prior to their discussion in public session, it is settled case law that this examination is carried out on the basis of reference most favorable to the parliamentary initiative. : the initial text tabled in committee. In law, on this basis, reinstatement amendments must be declared admissible. And debated, Thursday, June 8.

Any other decision by Yaël Braun-Pivet would constitute a questioning of the constant practice of the Constitution and the regulations and an attack of an unprecedented scale on the parliamentary initiative.

You have 46.35% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.