“The reactions to the adoption of the text carry the seeds of distrust of the institutions”

2023-04-26 06:30:36

Lhe legislative process which led to the adoption of the law of April 14, 2023 reforming pensions gave rise to numerous and sometimes violent criticisms. However, as judged by the Constitutional Council, the text was adopted and promulgated in compliance with the conditions provided for by the Constitution. If one can wonder about the perfect conformity of this process with the spirit of the texts, it appears to conform to their letter.

In this respect, the criticisms addressed to the Constitutional Council are unfounded. It should be remembered that he had, initially, only limited prerogatives. It has gradually, thanks in particular to the quality of its decisions, established its authority. But it is commendable that he did not want, by censoring the legislative procedure, to recognize a power which was not recognized by the constituent. It does not have, like the Supreme Courts of the countries of common law, a power to create the norm. Its mission is to control the conformity of texts with a written Constitution. He obviously has, within the framework of this mission, the room for maneuver conferred on him by texts such as the Declaration of 1789. But his power remains framed by the Constitution.

Also read the column: Article reserved for our subscribers “In the eyes of the founders of the American Republic, such great power of the Supreme Court would have been an aberration”

We will limit ourselves to pointing out that, contrary to what is sometimes argued, recourse to the procedure provided for in Article 49.3 of the Constitution prohibits considering that the text has been voted by the National Assembly: because of the motion of censure, the deputies did not decide solely on the basis of the effects and issues of the law. They necessarily considered the results, difficult to anticipate, that new elections were likely to produce on the composition of the National Assembly.

For thought

However, the number and the violence of the reactions which were expressed encourage us not to be satisfied with these conclusions. The reactions to the adoption of this reform in fact carry the seeds of distrust of the institutions that took part in this process. However, this observation is not neutral. We cannot count on the fact that citizens will forget their grievances. Very often, the anger does not completely disappear and resurfaces on another occasion, all the more violently because it will not have been heard. It can, in particular, be expressed through a protest vote.

However, democracy is never acquired and must always be protected. One of the conditions for its proper functioning lies in the support of citizens. Each agrees to delegate part of his sovereignty only because he considers that his will is taken into account and respected by the institutions. Conversely, the feeling of not having any influence on the decisions of the public authorities can generate violence, because it is sometimes the recourse of those who believe that they no longer have a legal and peaceful means of making themselves heard.

You have 50.66% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.