The president had promised face to face with the 150 members of the Citizen's Climate Convention at their last meeting in December: he will propose a referendum to integrate the environment into the French Constitution.
Of course, we are not sure that this great popular vote will take place one day, it would first be necessary for the text to be voted in identical terms by the National Assembly and especially by the Senate.
Simple greening of the text or real revolution, opinions are very clear.
On the benches of the Assembly, we have been thinking since Tuesday to modify Article 1 of the text which sets the principles of our Fifth Republic.
One which recalls in particular that France is an "indivisible, secular, democratic and social democracy".
This would not be a first: a paragraph aimed at equality between men and women was thus added in 2008. This time, the participants of the Climate Convention propose to add to it that France “guarantees the preservation of biodiversity and the environment. environment and the fight against climate change.
»Wording currently being debated in the hemicycle.
The collective “Our ecological constitution” has been pushing for more than three years in this direction.
“Of course, modifying article 1 of the Constitution has a symbolic impact, but not that, assures Anne-Sophie Lahaye, coordinator of this gathering of environmental associations.
With the verb to guarantee, the text implies an obligation to act on the part of the State ”.
In June 2018, Nicolas Hulot, then Minister of the Environment, stepped up to demand this addition.
At the time, we spoke of "ensuring" the protection of the environment, or "acting" in favor of ...
Concretely, what would this text change?
"If this text passed, we could not, for example, re-authorize neonicotinoids in the name of safeguarding biodiversity" replied the activist while the government has temporarily allowed these pesticides to return to the fields, to protect the beet industry. , admitting the dangers of these "bee killer" products.
"Why are we getting excited over the word guarantee?"
Consulted on this modification of the Constitution, the Council of State issued a severe opinion last month.
"The best proof that it interferes with interests," said Anne-Sophie Lahaye.
This is not the opinion of the lawyer Arnaud Gossement, expert in environmental law, for whom the proposed text, "of the gloubi-boulga" was "oiled" by the Council of State because it "Does not change anything at all".
In fact, the protection of the climate and biodiversity is already provided for in the 2004 Environmental Charter which therefore has the same value for judges as the Constitution - or the declaration of human and citizen rights.
"Why are we excited about the word guarantee, it's a fictitious debate," says the lawyer.
Whatever the verb, we can for example note that this formulation represents a step back since it only envisages the preservation of the climate and biodiversity when the Environmental Charter is attached to the preservation and improvement. "And Maître Gossement to quote the terrible levels of fine particles in the Arve valley (Haute-Savoie)," Should we be content to keep this pollution screed and let the populations die?
Of course not, ”argues the lawyer.
The Council of State notes that this is the third time in three years that it is examining a constitutional reform project to integrate the environment.
READ ALSO>
The defense of the environment in the Constitution, what would it change concretely?
“The same causes producing the same effects, in all likelihood, the Senate will manage to scuttle this proposal, sighs Arnaud Gossement.
After 2018, 2019, the government defends for the third time its own proposal in favor of the Citizens' Convention.
"