In the polite exercise of vows, it is sometimes helpful to have experience in diplomatic language. This is the case of Laurent Fabius. The President of the Constitutional Council, former Prime Minister (1984-1986) and former Foreign Minister (2012-2016) is unrivaled when it comes to conveying specific messages. And he didn't miss that when he greeted the President of the Republic (behind closed doors) on Monday, January 8th.
Read also the analysis: Article reserved for our subscribers “Immigration law: measures likely to be censored by the Constitutional Council.”
The focus of the criticism is the behavior of the executive towards the Constitutional Council at the end of December 2023 when the “Immigration Law” was passed. First Gérald Darmanin, then Elisabeth Borne and finally Emmanuel Macron recognized that the text contained unconstitutional provisions. Excursions that had left many lawyers suffocating. At the end of December, Patrice Spinosi, lawyer and human rights expert, assessed “that there is a desire to question the limits of constitutional jurisprudence and to create a tension between the political will and the guardians of the state.” »
Apparently Mr. Fabius shares this opinion. “Mr President, I emphasized at the beginning of my remarks that the Constitutional Council is neither an echo chamber of public opinion nor an appeal chamber for the decisions of Parliament, but the judge of the constitutionality of laws, and I added that a simple definition is probably The former head of government said that it had not been adopted by everyone or not yet. The year 2003 did indeed cause some confusion between law and politics among my colleagues and me. We can have different opinions about the relevance of a proposed law, we can consider it more or less appropriate, more or less justified, but that is not the job of the Constitutional Council. The Council's task is to decide on the law independently of the text before it. » And to quote his “predecessor and friend Robert Badinter”, another socialist who chaired the Constitutional Council (1986-1995): “An unconstitutional law is necessarily bad, but a bad law is not necessarily unconstitutional.” »
“Faustian Pact”
After this reminder was made, Mr. Fabius didn't stop. “If we do not risk exposing our democracy to great danger, we should remember that in a progressive democratic regime like ours we can change the legal situation at any time, but to do so we must always ensure respect.” for the rule of law, which is guaranteed by a A series of fundamental principles such as the separation of powers, the principle of legality and the independence of judges, emphasized Mr. Fabius. It is almost fifty years since the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Council confirmed this in the following words: The law expresses the general will in accordance with the Constitution. » The President of the Constitutional Council clearly reminds the head of state of the foundations of a “rule of law”, in particular this rule: We cannot vote for a law of which we know that certain provisions contradict the Basic Law.
You still have 30% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.