Even in the event of validation of the pension reform this Friday by the Constitutional Council, the possible shared initiative referendum (RIP) would not prevent Emmanuel Macron from promulgating the law, supposed to come into force on September 1. Not so sure…
The Constitutional Council is eagerly awaited this Friday afternoon. Around 6 p.m., the Elders will announce whether they are censoring several articles or the entire pension reform. The nine members of the institution must also decide on follow-up to the RIP, this shared initiative referendum which was deposited on their desk as early as 49.3 used by the government in March.
In the event of legal validation by the Constitutional Council, the elected representatives who initiated the process will then have 9 months to convince 4.8 million French people registered on the electoral lists in age to sign this RIP to organize a referendum within a year, if the National Assembly and the Senate do not vote on the new text proposed by the RIP. According to a survey go for Le Figaro this week, 74% of French people say they are ready to sign ‘certainly’ or ‘probably’ this text.
The conditions required for the rfrendum (parliamentarian signatures, scope of the proposal, etc.) seem united and the green light for the RIP by the Constitutional Council is likely, according to Laurline Fontaine, professor of public law, quoted by AFP.
What happens to the law in case of RIP?
If the pension reform is not censored as a whole, nothing will prevent the President of the Republic Emmanuel Macron from promulgating the law and sticking to his timetable for the entry into force of the new text from September 1. The legal retirement age would then be raised gradually by three months per year to reach 64 years of age in 2030. It will then also be necessary to justify 43 years of contributions for a full pension.
Problem, the RIP is in reality a counter-bill which induces great uncertainty, both for the authorities and for the employees. In the bill signed by 250 left-wing parliamentarians, it is planned that the retirement age cannot exceed 62 years. From a logistical point of view, the acceptance of the RIP risks paralyzing the implementation of the law because, it is complicated to move back the age for a few months and then go back, commented in the columns of the Parisian the Sciences-po public law professor, Guillaume Tusseau.
In a forum widely how at World, the constitutionalist Dominique Rousseau had considered it desirable to take a break in the event of validation of the RIP this Friday by the Elders, so as not to stir up anger and avoid any conflict with the referendum procedure. (…) In the end, we risk ending up with two laws, one raising the retirement age to 64 and the other maintaining it at 62. We will then be in a conflict of standards.
The RIP was created to modify the law
But in the Le Figaro, Jean-ric Schoettl, former Secretary General of the Constitutional Council, and Jean-Pierre Camby, associate professor at the University of Paris-Saclay, believe that this announced age – 62 years – can be analyzed as a constraint on future law and make the Wise. Only the Constitution can indeed subject the law to prohibitions or obligations, they specify. To guard against this situation, Nupes has already filed Thursday, April 13 a second request for RIP
The RIP could therefore have the effect of delaying the implementation of the reform even if, in the event of non-application of a law, the Council of State could also compel the government to apply the text voted by 49.3 and not censored by the Constitutional Council.
Moreover, the essence of the RIP is to go back on an existing law by modifying it. It cannot in any case suspend a law, recalls the professor of Public Law, Philippe Blachr, in Capital. Clearly, only a validation of the text, even partial, and a rejection of the RIP, by the Elders can clarify the future of Emmanuel Macron and Elisabeth Borne. And clarify the future of millions of future withdrawals.