Faced with the decision of the Constitutional Council which censored, on Thursday, a large part of the “immigration” text, MP LR Christelle d'Intorni shares with her colleagues an observation of failure.
And in the wake of yet another twist, which only highlights the difficulty for France to initiate a real reform of its migration policy, the elected representative of the Alpes-Maritimes defends a constitutional law proposal to reform the jurisdiction of rue Montpensier.
“
Never has distrust in our justice and our institutions been so strong.
The French are rightly questioning the legitimacy of the status and the politicized designation of the members of the Constitutional Council
,” confides the MP to Le Figaro, before regretting that “
every political decision remains hanging on the forks
” of an institution which she denounces “
the increasing interference
” in the field of intervention of Parliament.
She thus deplores that this Council is “
gradually taking precedence over democracy
”.
Via the introduction of three articles, the MP's proposal aims at three objectives: "
to rule out any praetorian approach of legislative riders
" (while all those of the immigration text have just been rebutted by the Sages), "
to reform the method of designation
» of the members of the Constitutional Council and “
no longer allow
” this jurisdiction to censor a legislative measure on this basis of “
cavaliers
”.
Article 1 specifies in black and white that the Council can no longer invoke this basis to support censorship.
“Depoliticize” the institution
Article 2 recommends, for its part, an institution with 10 members (compared to 9 currently), non-renewable nine-year mandates and renewal by thirds every three years.
Two members would be appointed by the President of the Republic (compared to 3 today), and all the others would be elected, i.e. one member elected by the Assembly (compared to 3 appointed), 1 member elected by the Senate (compared to 3 appointed) , three members elected by the Court of Cassation (new) and three members elected by the Council of State (new), with respect for parity.
Another novelty, the reform wants to put an end to the former presidents of the Republic who are ex officio members.
“It’s a way of depoliticizing the institution
,” insists the elected official.
Finally, article 3 specifies that only substantive irregularities can justify the censorship of a text adopted by parliament.
MP LR is convinced that with such a reform, the judges of rue Montpensier would not have been able to decide “
instead of national representation
”.
In the preliminary statement of her reasons, Christelle d'Intorni points to an expansion of the Council's field of intervention over time which has ended up confronting sovereignty with the control of constitutionality.
“
Moreover, to the criticism of the intrinsic competence of the Constitutional Council is added a questioning of the very legitimacy of its members
”, continues the lawyer from Alpes-Maritimes, before denouncing a “
jurisdictionalization
” which, according to her , will have ended up “
strongly accentuating the discredit as well as the distrust of our fellow citizens
” towards an institution “
whose members would fail in their duty of impartiality
”.