A tricolor flag in the background. The President of the Republic on the first floor. It is 8 p.m. this Tuesday, December 31 when Emmanuel Macron addresses, from the Elysée, his traditional wishes to the French. “We are a quarter of a century away. […] We will have choices to make for our economy, our democracy, our security, our children”, states the Head of State. “I will ask you to decide on some of these determining issues, because each of you will have a role to play. play”, he continues. A request as broad as the themes listed. But for those around the president, there is no doubt: if the words “referendum” or “citizens’ convention” have not been uttered, they could well to be “the project” to which Emmanuel Macron refers.
In 2019, dozens of French people had already gathered at a first citizens’ convention under the presidency of Emmanuel Macron around the question “How to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40% by 2030, in a spirit of social justice? Same democratic experience three years later. This time, at the end of life.
If the citizens’ conventions were thus implemented twice, the referendum was neglected. However, it’s not for lack of thinking about it. Often mentioned by Emmanuel Macron since his first mandate in 2017, notably for pension reform, this vote has not been called since 2005. In what cases and on what subjects could the referendum be decided 20 years later?
Articles 11 and 89
Since 1958, the Constitution has allowed the President of the Republic to use two types of referendum. The first, provided for by article 11, is what could be described as “traditional”. This allows you to ask the French a question in order to decide in particular on the adoption or not of a proposal or a bill. Only condition: Article 11 requires that the subject relate to “the organization of public authorities, to reforms relating to the economic, social or environmental policy of the nation and to the public services which contribute to it, or tending to authorize ratification of a treaty which, without being contrary to the Constitution, would have repercussions on the functioning of the institutions.” Questions related to immigration are therefore excluded, due to their societal and not exclusively economic nature.
To date, the last referendum permitted by Article 11 dates back to May 29, 2005, the date on which the French voted on the European Constitutional Treaty (ECT). A vote resulting in a large defeat for the “no” vote with 54.68% of the votes cast, or 2,641,238 votes more than the “yes” vote.
But article 11 is not the only one that Emmanuel Macron can use. Article 89 also allows him to ask for the opinion of the people. This time, to revise the Constitution. To do this, the Senate and the National Assembly must start by voting on the constitutional revision word for word. The modification is then submitted to a referendum. A complexity which explains why this vote has only rarely been used, the last dating from September 24, 2000 under the presidency of Jacques Chirac. This was organized around the following question: “Do you approve of the draft constitutional law setting the duration of the mandate of the President of the Republic at five years?” Result: the “yes” vote largely won with 73.21% of the votes cast, despite a strong abstention. In 2002, the five-year term was applied for the first time. Since then, no attempt at a constitutional referendum has managed to pass the test of both chambers.
A referendum, yes, but on what?
On what subject could the next referendum be decided? For the left, a choice is essential: that of pension reform. RTL political guest this Wednesday, January 1, the environmentalist MP Sandrine Rousseau rushed into the open door left by Emmanuel Macron. “I approve of the possibility of resorting to a referendum. But in these cases, given that what is currently blocking democracy is pensions, let him hold the first referendum on pensions. […] We can also imagine that these are subjects around the end of life, around the transformation of our energy,” she declared.
A hypothesis quickly dismissed by Benjamin Morel, political scientist and constitutionalist, recalling that the risk of disavowal would be strong for the President of the Republic. “Since societal questions are excluded, there are not many consensual subjects for a referendum,” he explained to AFP, estimating that “voters could therefore be called upon to decide on subjects not very concerning.” Some members of the presidential camp have recently mentioned a possible referendum to establish proportional representation in legislative elections. A subject, far removed from the daily concerns of voters, which could disappoint more than one.