ASSEMBLED DISSOLUTION. Emmanuel Macron would think of the dissolution of the National Assembly according to the words of his close advisers to the media. But is this really in the plans of the majority or simply a threat addressed to the opposition?
And if Emmanuel Macron envisages a dissolution of the National Assembly more quickly than expected? More than if, in reality the question is rather “when?” because in the ranks of the majority we are preparing for this eventuality. According to the confidences of the number one of the Macronist party, Stéphane Séjourné, in the November 6 edition of the Sunday newspaper, everything is in place to deal with the renewal of deputies, from the “protocol of dissolution” to the “detailed retroplanning” on the program of the days following the dissolution. An announcement that sounds like a threat at a time when the government is using 49.3 without moderation to vote on budget texts and where motions of censure are aligned. However, it would not be just a warning, the President of the Republic confided to his close advisers that he had matured the affair in particular during his interview granted on October 26 to France 2 when he threw on Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Le Pen, the two leaders of the majority opposition groups, the responsibility for the ambient chaos of the hemicycle. A clever strategy because if politically the presidential camp has a lot to gain with a dissolution, it could also lose all credibility with the French who must be given a reason other than their own political interests to justify the dissolution which would call for the holding of new legislative elections.
The dissolution of the National Assembly would therefore be ready to be pronounced at the slightest opportunity, in particular if the left and the extreme vote in concert for a motion of censure against the government of Elisabeth Borne, as indicated by remarks from a dinner on September 28 at the Elysée and reported by BFM-TV. Yet still within the Renaissance ranks others see more of a warning than a plan in these allusions to disbandment. Near Politicoa close associate of the Elysée and a fine strategist assured that if the overthrow of the deputies was so imminent, nominations and the search for candidates would have already begun, adding that “if someone serious had worked on it, [l’agenda prévisionnel] would not start on D+1 but on D-30”. So what discourse should we rely on? Can the President of the Republic really initiate a dissolution of the National Assembly? How and above all why?
The first months of Emmanuel Macron’s second five-year term were marked by the cacophony of the National Assembly. The presidential majority reached an agreement on the law for purchasing power without too much difficulty, but since then the exchanges have been paralyzed, as evidenced by the use four times by the Prime Minister of 49.3 to vote the 2023 budget and the six motions censors who responded. The pension reform and the immigration bill announced for the beginning of 2023 are still preparing heated debates in the hemicycle. The risk for Emmanuel Macron, elected on the basis of a reform program, is to be forced into immobility for lack of an absolute majority in the Assembly.
If he fails to convince text by text around forty deputies, the only other way for the Head of State to carry out his projects is to force the passage allowed by 49.3. The counterpart of this article can also turn out to be a solution of last resort for the presidential camp. Once the “responsibility of the government” of Elisabeth Borne engaged by the use of the parliamentary weapon, the deputies are free to table a motion of censure which if it is voted by an absolute majority (289 votes out of 544) rejects the law and overthrows the executive. But then in such a scenario, Emmanuel Macron says he has planned a plan: that of dissolving the Assembly and organizing new legislative elections to perhaps, this time, obtain an absolute majority.
What are Emmanuel Macron’s arguments for dissolving the National Assembly?
If the dissolution of the National Assembly is pronounced, it is with one objective in view: to obtain an absolute majority in the Assembly. On this subject, Stéphane Séjourné assured in the columns of the JDD on November 6, having started prospecting to appoint in February 2023 “a delegate in each constituency whose deputy is not an elected member of the presidential movement” and thus have a candidate in the event of dissolution. If the question of nominations and candidates for possible legislative elections is resolved, remains that of the vote. The holding of new elections does not guarantee victory and even less the obtaining of an absolute majority by Emmanuel Macron. On the contrary, according to a survey published in the JDDto date a vote would not benefit anyone except the National Rally.
In addition to the majority presence of deputies from the presidential camp, Emmanuel Macron could see another argument for the dissolution of the Assembly: to close ranks and remind the allied parties who holds the strings. François Bayrou’s MoDem and Edouard Philippe’s Horizons have begun to show signs of emancipation which are not to the taste of Emmanuel Macron, already fragile in the hemicycle.
On the other hand, the dissolution can present disadvantages, starting with the risk of losing new seats for the Renaissance deputies, but also of ending all the discussions even though the government has been advocating dialogue for months. Majority executives thus fear that deciding on dissolution is a bad strategy when Les Républicains have already proven to be open to discussion and to voting on Macronist projects. “The only thing that matters is to build majorities text by text. When it works, we send a reverse message, it’s completely stupid! […] You don’t build majorities with these kinds of threats,” he said, annoyed. Politico.
Learn more
The President of the Republic has the right to proceed with a parliamentary dissolution: this consists of prematurely ending the mandate of the National Assembly. This is the last resort in the event of an extreme situation: when the president does not have a stable majority in the Assembly, or in the event of a crisis. It can be perceived as the essential loophole in the event that the country’s policy is blocked, or that we are witnessing an institutional paralysis, with a level of dissensus such that the governance of the country becomes impossible. In fact, when the opposition is too powerful in the hemicycle and the presidential camp fails to form alliances to pass the laws provided for in its program, the country can get bogged down in immobility. By provoking new legislative elections, the dissolution makes it possible to solicit the voters so that they designate another majority, heard one which will support its action.
Provided for in Article 12 of the Constitution, the dissolution may be pronounced by the President of the Republic “after consultation with the Prime Minister and the Presidents” of the National Assembly and the Senate”. Its relatively simple mechanism is mainly based on the President’s will. As such, in his book “Les dissolutions sous la Ve République” published in 1997, the constitutionalist Jean-Claude Zarka speaks of it as a “quasi-discretionary competence” of the President of the Republic, the only obligations enshrined in the Constitution being the prior consultation of the Prime Minister and the two presidents of the parliamentary chambers (knowing that he only gives a purely advisory opinion). In addition, this exercise is a prerogative exempt from ministerial countersignature provided for in the article 19, which means that it only depends on the President of the Republic.
The Constitution provides some limitations to the right of dissolution. On the one hand, the president cannot dissolve the National Assembly during the exercise of the exceptional powers provided for by article 16 of the constitution. On the other hand, dissolution is also prohibited when the President of the Senate exercises the interim of the Presidency of the Republic, as provided for in Article 7 of the Constitution. The only truly binding rules governing the dissolution of the Assembly relate to time limits. The Constitution specifies that the Head of State must wait one year between two dissolutions. But in the present case, Emmanuel Macron will not have to wait because, as specified The world, the time limit to be observed after a legislative election is not specified in the law and can be reduced to nil according to constitutional interpretation. Once the dissolution has been pronounced, the convocation of new legislative elections must take place “twenty days at least and forty days at most after the dissolution”.
There have been five dissolutions of the National Assembly in the history of the Fifth Republic… And all of them did not lead to the same result. Twice, it was used to respond to a national crisis: it was a success for Charles de Gaulle, who extricated himself from particularly delicate situations by obtaining a solid majority in 1962 and 1968. But, out of the three which were intended to consolidate (even to build) the majority of the presidential camp in the Assembly, one of them was a marked failure. One thinks here of Jacques Chirac’s failed electoral gamble in 1997, who dissolved Parliament with the aim of obtaining a larger majority and thus avoiding any ounce of political blockage during the passing of laws. He finally lost everything when the Socialists ousted him at the ballot box, propelling Lionel Jospin to the post of Prime Minister and forcing Jacques Chirac to live together. It remains to be seen whether, in the case of Emmanuel Macron, a possible dissolution would be justified by parliamentary paralysis or by the need to overcome political divisions to overcome a crisis. Or if it would appear as a desperate attempt to oust the opposition.