Here I am dressed in blue, white and red to celebrate a very special Bastille Day, which follows a somewhat turbulent recent French democratic life.
On June 9, 2024, the President of the French Republic Emmanuel Macron applies Article 12 of the French Constitution which allows him to end a legislature and pronounces, to everyone’s surprise, the dissolution of the National Assembly, following the victory of the main far-right party the Rassemblement National (RN) and the snub of the presidential majority (14.6% of the votes) during the European elections in France.
The legislative elections therefore take mechanically place on June 30 and July 7, 2024 in order to renew the National Assembly.
With a record participation of 66.7%, the first round of the legislative elections places the RN in the lead, with 33.15% of the votes.
The Nouveau Front Populaire (NFP), which brings together several forces from the left bloc, comes in second position with 27.99% of the votes.
The presidential majority, Ensemble, comes in third place with 20.04% of the votes, while the Republicains associated with diverse right-wing allies gather 10.23% of the votes and thus occupy fourth place.
With a record participation of 67.1%, the second round of the legislative elections grants, against all expectations, 180 seats to the NFP, 163 seats to Ensemble and its allies, and, unlike the first round, puts the RN and its allies in third place with 143 seats in the National Assembly; leaving the Republicains and their allies far behind with 66 seats.
Although the result of the legislative elections is made official the day after the vote, i.e. July 8, 2024, although the Prime Minister presents his resignation on the same day, the President of the Republic refuses such resignation under the pretext of “ensuring the stability of the country” and the French people find themselves seven days after the defeat of the presidential party with the same Prime Minister.
How did we get there?
The hyper-presidentialization carried out by Emmanuel Macron upon his arrival in power only follows his hyper-personification of the figure of the savior – widely acclaimed following a progressive decay of the political life, morality and parties during for years.
And since there can only be a savior if the danger is imminent, this hyper-presidentialization is accompanied during Macron’s first mandate and the first two years of the second mandate, by a political and media narrative aimed at hyper-demonization of certain opposition figures and opinions, leading to the creation of a vague so-called far-left magma bringing together personalities who are certainly left-wing but with very varied opinions, ranging from the most radical to the most moderate. One can be extremely annoyed by an overwhelming, radical and sometimes immoderate Jean-Luc Mélenchon, but one cannot seriously demonize people like Raphaël Glucksmann or François Ruffin – even if one does not agree with their political ideas. However, they have long been swept away and drowned in this so-called far-left magma.
This is called a scarecrow effect.
There is hardly any question of a scarecrow when it comes to the large far-right party, the RN. For almost forty years, the RN and its ancestor the Front National (FN) have always served the power in place as an instrument of political division, and it is President François Mitterrand, from the height of his immense intelligence unfortunately misguided by too much reading of Machiavelli, who opened Pandora’s box.
It was easy for this great manipulator, worried about the latent porosity between certain right-wing personalities and the FN, to pass a new electoral law on July 10, 1985 allowing greater representativeness, under the media excuse of strengthening the electoral pluralism.
The result lived up to the hidden agenda of President Mitterrand: following the legislative elections of March 1986, thirty-five FN deputies were elected. Like the wolf on the fold, the FN would then fight with the two historic political parties – but especially the right-wing party, in the mind of François Mitterrand.
Emmanuel Macron only repeats the Machiavellian adage and the Mitterrandian posture: “divide and rule”. He is helped by the decay of the traditional political parties, a tainted public morality and the revivification of a war of religions and cultures hammered out in the media.
The decision of the President of the French Republic to dissolve the National Assembly finds its origin in the victory of the RN in the European elections. Was it a presidential poker move aiming at the same time to divide and revitalize a presidential coalition which no longer had an absolute majority in the National Assembly since 2022, but which had 246 seats? We’ll never know.
The French National Assembly is made up of 577 seats. The absolute majority is granted to the political party which holds 289 or more, and the relative majority is granted to the party which holds the greatest number of seats compared to the others.
The absolute majority allows legislative texts to be adopted without needing the support of minority opponents.
If no political party holds an absolute majority of seats – which is the case today (180 seats for the NFP, 163 seats for Ensemble and its allies, 143 seats for the RN and 66 seats for Les Républicains associated with various allies), coalitions between different parties may be necessary to have legal texts adopted even if the practice is that the relative majority (more than half of the votes of the deputies present in the hemicycle at the time of the adoption of the law concerned) is sufficient.
Here is the legislative aspect. Today, on July 14, 2024, the composition of the French National Assembly is only the illustration and the result of the much sought-after division. Three heterogeneous blocs make it up and we can expect heated parliamentary debates, since there are no longer two political parties, but three – which is true and untrue given the general fragmentation of the various political currents which animate the National Assembly.
Regarding the executive aspect, Article 8 of the Constitution confers on the President of the French Republic the power to appoint the Prime Minister. In the event of the absence of a presidential majority in the National Assembly, it has until now always been accepted that the President appoints a Prime Minister from the new majority and thus establishes a period of cohabitation – which was the case in 1986 with the appointment of Jacques Chirac, in 1993 with that of Édouard Balladur and in 1997 with that of Lionel Jospin.
One might therefore think that the President just has to appoint a Prime Minister from the NFP.
But the current fragmentation of the National Assembly complicates a simple process, since the government, which must benefit from the confidence of Parliament (that is to say the National Assembly and the Senate) is, under the terms of Article 20 of the French Constitution, responsible to the National Assembly which can overthrow it by the vote of a motion of no-confidence provided for by article 49 of the Constitution.
We could therefore believe that the President of the French Republic ensures that the continuity of the State is ultimately preserved, by giving time to the different political parties and coalitions to propose to him a list of potential prime ministers.
However, the terms of the letter to the French people issued by the President of the Republic of July 10, 2024 leave one wondering. He welcomes the participation of voters but believes that “no one won. No political force obtains a sufficient majority on its own and the blocs or coalitions that emerge from these elections are all in the minority. Divided in the first round, united by the reciprocal withdrawals from the second, elected thanks to the votes of the voters of their former adversaries, only the republican forces represent an absolute majority […] The current government will continue to exercise its responsibilities and then be in charge of current affairs as required by republican tradition.”
Even if the fragmentation of the French National Assembly is real, there is definitely a winner and democratic logic would dictate that the President of the Republic chooses his Prime Minister from the predominant parliamentary group in the National Assembly – the Constitution ultimately governs only numbers and arithmetic. Furthermore, the President plays on words by speaking of “sufficient majority” since – as we have seen – there are three types of majorities (absolute, relative and qualified) and his camp itself legislated for two years with a relative majority of 246 seats, which did not seem to disturb him. Finally, pointing out the game of alliances and coalitions between the two rounds (that is to say a permanent event under the Fifth Republic) as an illustration of everyone’s minority is at best bad faith, at worst of democratic denial.
The appointment of a new Prime Minister therefore remains suspended until further notice, while the President had three options:
- refuse the resignation of his Prime Minister (which he did),
- accept the resignation of the Prime Minister and appoint another (but one understands that it takes time for the various parties to agree on a list of names of potential prime ministers), or
- accept the resignation of his Prime Minister while awaiting a list of potential prime ministers and nevertheless let the resigning Prime Minister take care of the day-to-day tasks.
The respect for the democratic exercise according to which it is the people who designate their representatives, whether they belong to the executive power or the legislative power, would have required the President of the French Republic to accept the resignation of his Prime Minister while putting him in charge of day-to-day tasks while awaiting the nomination of his successor. This is how the continuity of the State is ensured and it is a principle of administrative law which is only the republican version of the royal adage “the King is dead, long live the King”.
However, the President of the Republic has chosen to maintain his Prime Minister in office who, if I quote the terms of the President’s letter mentioned above, “continues to exercise his responsibilities and then will be in charge of day-to-day tasks”.
A nice balancing act, the Gordian knot lies in the use of the word “then”.
What is Emmanuel Macron currently doing? He is buying time and ensuring that his power (understood in the broad sense, since his Prime Minister is from his political party) is not diminished by the result of the legislative elections and that he preserves for the moment all of their prerogatives – the executive power that they both represent having a fairly large autonomous regulatory power, with the issuance of decrees, orders or circulars.
Under Article 12 of the Constitution, the National Assembly meets automatically on the second Thursday following its election. If this meeting takes place outside the period planned for the ordinary session – which is the case – a session is automatically opened for a period of fifteen days.
Hectic days await us, between a fragmented National Assembly and an executive power which, under the guise of ensuring the stability of the country, has clung to its prerogatives in a questionable manner since July 7, 2024, denying and defying all democratic logic.
Karen Millen shirt – Gianfranco Ferré skirt – SJP shoes – Bvlgari purse – Chanel sunglasses – Monoprix scarf as a belt
July 14, 2024
