|
||
|
|
|
|
Legislative procedure and steps
The session is the period of the year when Parliament meets validly to deliberate in plenary sitting. The 1958 Constitution (Article 28) had laid down two ordinary sessions, of approximately three months each, the first in autumn, and the second in spring, separated by intersessions. The opening of the ordinary April session was the reference point used for the beginning of the new term, save dissolution (‘The powers of the National Assembly expire at the opening of the fifth ordinary April session following its election.’) Since 1958, the number of sitting days at the National Assembly has increased almost constantly. The average was 90 days from 1959 to 1970, reached one hundred in 1971, and exceeded 150 in 1982. The narrowness of the time framework imposed by the Constitution has led to recourse to compensatory measures or practices, such as night sittings, and above all the multiplication of extraordinary sessions, nearly all convened on request by the Prime Minister (Article 29 of the Constitution). The reform proposals led to the vote by Congress meeting in Versailles on 31 July 1995 of the following text: ‘Parliament shall convene as of right in one ordinary session which shall start on the first working day of October and shall end on the last working day of June.’ (Article 28, paragraph 1, of the Constitution amended by the constitutional Act no. 95-88 of 4 August 1995). The new Article 28, in its paragraph 2, fixes a maximum number of one hundred and twenty sitting days, yet states in its third paragraph: ‘The Prime Minister, after consulting the President of the assembly concerned, or the majority of the members of each assembly, may decide to meet for additional sitting days.’ As a result of the continuity of the session, the 1995 amendment has allowed the assemblies better to master the rhythm of their work. The fact that ‘The sitting weeks shall be determined by each assembly.’ (Article 28, paragraph 2), allows them to decide the weeks when public sittings are interrupted — during major holidays or election campaigns. Also, ‘The days and hours of sittings shall be determined by the Rules of Procedure of each assembly.’ (Article 28, paragraph 4): the provisions set in place endeavour to group the holding of public sittings on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, in order to leave the rest of the week for activities by parliamentarians in their constituencies.
According to Article 20 of the Constitution, ‘The Government shall determine and conduct the policy of the Nation.’ As this policy leads in particular to the elaboration of legal rules in the form of government bills, it follows that the Government should be able to submit these bills to the assemblies at the time it deems opportune, depending on the adoption schedule of its legislative programme. Hence Article 48, paragraph 1, of the Constitution: ‘… precedence shall be given on the agendas of the assemblies, and in the order determined by the Government, to the debate of government bills and of Members’ bills accepted by the Government.’ The priority agenda is transmitted to the Chairmen’s Conference, which normally meets once a week on Tuesday morning. Following the Conference, the agenda is transmitted to the Assembly at the first public sitting that follows. This agenda applies ‘… for the current week and the two following weeks.’ (Article 48, paragraph 4, of the Rules of Procedure). By a mere letter or by an oral communication in a sitting, the Government can alter the initial priority agenda. Its prerogatives also imply a steering power over the parliamentary procedure: conduct of the shuttle process; declaration of urgency, which allows the possible meeting of a joint committee of seven deputies and seven senators after only one reading in each assembly; withdrawal of a text from the agenda or decision to suspend its debate… Further, committees cannot prevent the consideration of a priority bill by delaying the tabling of their conclusions. Failure to publish a committee report on a bill cannot form an obstacle to its debate. This results from a decision by the Constitutional Council (no. 84-81 of 10 and 11 October 1984) that debate in public sitting can commence, with or without a report, once the bill has been examined in a committee and the right of amendment has been able to be exercised. Precedence as determined by the Government is however sometimes limited or framed. According to Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, a bill of an institutional nature shall not be debated in the assembly in which it was first introduced until fifteen days have elapsed since its introduction. Debate of motions of censure (Article 49, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the Constitution) shall take place at the latest on the third sitting day following expiry of the constitutional period of forty-eight hours after the introduction of the motion. This date is determined by the Chairmen’s Conference. ‘The closing of ordinary or extraordinary sessions shall be postponed by right in order to permit the application of Article 49, if the case arises. Additional sittings shall be held by right for the same purpose.’ Pursuant to Article 48, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, some sittings shall be devoted to questions from deputies and to answers by the Government (see Third part). The constitutional Act of 4 August 1995 added a third paragraph to Article 48 of the Constitution according to which ‘At one sitting a month, precedence shall be given to the agenda determined by each assembly.’ Most of these sittings — known familiarly as niches parlementaires — have been devoted to the consideration of Members’ bills. This opening up to parliamentary initiative is added to the possibilities offered by the supplementary agenda, which is the agenda that the Assembly can introduce in addition to the priority agenda, on proposal by the Chairmen’s’ Conference. In actual fact this possibility is rarely used and many Members’ bills debated under the Vth Republic have been set down on the priority agenda. By using this new possibility offered by Article 48, paragraph 3, of the Constitution, Parliament has been able to adopt, on its initiative, a higher number of Members’ bills and on important matters (PACS [civil solidarity pact], criminal responsibility of public decision makers, palliative care…), as well as examining Members’ bills set down on request by groups in the opposition. The priority agenda is frequently negotiated rather than imposed. Prior contacts enlighten the Government on the limits which committees can accept in view of their workload. When the assemblies consider their workload is heavier than what is reasonable they do not fail to state so. The number of bills passed each year by Parliament—bills whose importance naturally varies—is more or less constant: a hundred or so on average. Also, since October 1995, the Government has informed the Chairmen’s’ Conference, at the opening of each session and then at the beginning of March, of the business it intends to ask to be set down on the Assembly’s agenda and the envisaged period for its debate.
One of the most serious French political crises began when, in the morning of 16 May 1877, the President of the Republic, Mac-Mahon, had a letter carried to Jules Simon, Head of Government, in which the first sentence read: ‘Mr Président du Conseil (title of Head of Government under the IIIrd Republic), I have just read in the Official Gazette the report of yesterday’s sitting.’ There followed a series of reproaches which brought about the resignation of Jules Simon, then the dissolution of the Chamber of Deputies and, a few months later, to elections which, with the victory of the Republicans, led to the advent of the IIIrd Republic. The rule on the disclosure of debates had been the primary cause of the incident. Article 33, paragraph 1, of the Constitution lays down: ‘The sittings of the two assemblies shall be public.’ The disclosure of debates is firstly ensured by the physical presence of the public, which can access, with a sitting ticket issued by a deputy, the galleries overlooking the chamber (approximately 500 seats). On pain of exclusion, persons attending debates must not show either their approval or disapproval (memory of the revolutionary times). The 1958 Constitution lays down that ‘Each assembly may sit in camera at the request of the Prime Minister or of one tenth of its members.’ (Article 33, paragraph 2) but, since 1958, the assemblies have never sat in camera The Constitution sets forth that ‘A verbatim report of the debates shall be published in the Journal officiel.’ There are in fact two reports. First, the so called summary record, drawn up by the debate secretaries, gives a faithful and complete but condensed image of the debates. It is distributed a few hours after the sitting and is posted on the Assembly’s website (http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr ). Second, the verbatim report, drawn up by the debate drafters, is handed as a proof copy to the speakers approximately one and a half hours after their intervention. It is published on the National Assembly website thirty-six hours after the sitting, then by the Official Gazette (parliamentary debates edition) three to five days afterwards. It forms the official record, which alone forms the authentic text. Outside the scope of the Constitution, modern dissemination techniques, particularly television and then the Internet, have considerably broadened the scope of the disclosure of debates (see above).
The process which leads to debate in public sitting is the same for any instrument, whether a government bill or a Member’s bill: the instrument must be tabled before being sent to a committee for consideration. In a political or administrative assembly, a committee is a select formation tasked with preparing the work of the plenary meeting. Under the Vth Republic, the family of committees comprises, as before 1958, special or standing legislative committees and committees of inquiry. There is also a new representative, the joint committee of seven deputies and seven senators, tasked with endeavouring to reconcile the viewpoints of the two assemblies on government bills or Members’ bills under consideration by them. The 1958 Constitution strictly defined the rules governing legislative committees. The referral of a Government bill or a Member’s bill to a standing legislative committee for consideration is laid down by the Constitution as the exception, the rule being referral, at the request of the Government or of the Assembly having the bill before it, to committees specially set up for this purpose (Article 43, paragraph 1, of the Constitution). The number of standing legislative committees is limited to six in each assembly. The low number of standing committees, between which the 577 deputies are split, explains the large size of their staff. Two of them (Cultural, Family and Social Affairs Committee; Economic Affairs, Environment and Territory) have some 140 members (two-eighths of the total number of deputies), the four others (Foreign Affairs; National Defence and Armed Forces; Finance, General Economy and Planning; and Constitutional Acts, Legislation and General Administration) have 70 members (in other words one eighth). Deputies are appointed to committees by proportional representation of groups; therefore each committee reflects the Assembly’s political composition. ‘The discussion of government bills shall pertain, in the assembly which first has the bill before it, to the text introduced by the Government.’ (Article 42, paragraph 1, of the Constitution). This is a break with the prior state of affairs when amendments passed by the committee were included, on amending them, to the text submitted to the Assembly in plenary sitting. The amendments adopted by the committee, are recorded in the ‘comparative table’ of its report, and must again be tabled and debated in public sitting. The three innovations described above have experienced a variety of fates Special committees have not replaced standing committees. Only one hundredth of the texts have been referred to them (including some very important bills: the economic and social ordinances in 1967; nationalisations in 1981-1982; and the bill relating to spatial planning in 1994…). The consideration of an instrument by a standing committee has been a systematic solution for a long time, the creation of special committees therefore being somewhat exceptional. In 1980, the automatic setting up of a special committee in the event of requests for referrals for opinion to two standing committees was moreover abolished. The limiting of the number of standing committees to six has been maintained, although subject to criticisms. To a certain extent, the constitutional ban has been compensated by the creation of bodies such as the Offices and Delegations, although these inquiry and information bodies do not have legislative powers strictly speaking… It has also been proposed to reform the constitutional provision which imposes the discussion in public sitting of a Government text. The criticisms have not had any effect on this point either. For Members’ bills, which are rarer, it is the text—what is known as its ‘conclusions’ elaborated by the competent committee—which is submitted to the Assembly in public sitting. The Government for its part enjoys the right of amendment.
An amendment is a written proposal aimed at amending a text submitted to the deliberation of an assembly. It forms one of the three options open to the legislator: accepting without amending, rejecting, amending. However, some texts submitted to the assemblies cannot be amended: when they vote on Government bills authorising the ratification or approval of an international agreement, deputies accept, reject or adjourn but cannot amend (Rule 128 of the Rules of Procedure). Parliament passes a large number of such bills: they frequently form more than half of the hundred or so laws passed each year by Parliament. Variety of amendments While they are all aimed at amending the instrument to which they apply, amendments can achieve this in different ways: repealing amendment; substitution amendment: substitute the following text for this article, or this paragraph, or this sentence or part of a sentence… ; addition amendment: either by insertion or by addition; when an amendment consists in adding a new article to the text under discussion it forms an ‘additional article’; transfer amendment: it is proposed to change the place of a title, an article, sentence or part of a sentence; contraction amendment (shorter re-writing, to lighten the wording) or extension amendment (longer re-writing). Growth in the number of amendments The National Assembly has seen an increase from an annual maximum of 2,500 amendments until 1970 to 4,000 in the 1970s, and 5,000 on average in the 1980s. In the most recent period, the Assembly has dealt each year with more than 10,000 amendments. These figures are very high, even if the adopted amendments vary widely in scope. This growth can be explained firstly by the ease of use of amendments, despite their being inadmissible in some cases. It has also been considered that amendments, previously ‘the corollary of the right to initiate legislation’, have become its substitute. In the making of laws, parliament’s right to initiate legislation is now mainly exercised by the tabling of amendments. A FEW POINTS OF REFERENCE Parliament has produced a hundred or so Acts on average each year since the beginning of the Vth Republic. Among these Acts, a considerable number deal with authorising the approval or ratification of international agreements and comprise a single article. In contrast there are Acts comprising more than a hundred articles, such as the annual Finance Act. The proportion of Acts resulting from a government bill with respect to those resulting from a Member’s bill has varied. In recent year, the trend has been for a clear increase in the number of the latter which represent approximately half the instruments definitively adopted, except for those authorising the ratification of treaties or agreements. The National Assembly sat for 113 days during the 2003-2004 session (1 October 2003-30 June 2004), and 112 days during the 2002-2003 session). These figures correspond to 280 sittings and 1,058 hours for 2003-2004, 274 sittings and 1,065 hours for 2002-2003. During the 2003-2004 session, 13,437 amendments were brought before the National Assembly and 3,668 were adopted. The debate of an instrument set down on the National Assembly’s agenda comprises three phases: first, general presentation; second, except in the very rare case of interruption of the debate after the passing of a motion of censure, a phase of consideration of the clauses and amendments; and third, a vote on the whole instrument, sometimes postponed to a date allowing this vote to be more formal.
This comprises as a rule : The hearing of the minister(s) tasked with supporting debate of the Government bill, and sometimes the hearing of the Prime Minister. Members of the Government shall in any case ‘address either assembly whenever they so request.’ (Article 31 of the Constitution). Intervention of the rapporteur of the committee responsible followed possibly by the shorter intervention of the rapporteur of the committee(s) asked for its (their) opinion. When the debate concerns a Member’s bill, the ‘Government’— in other words the minister representing it in the debate —intervenes after the rapporteur to present its viewpoint or even its reservations or opposal to an instrument which does not emanate from it. If there is no procedural motion, the general debate then takes place, being ‘organised’ by the Chairmen’s’ Conference, which lays down a global length of time for debate and determines, on an essentially proportional basis, the time allocated to groups and non-attached deputies. Each group then subdivides between its members the time allocated to it and determines the order in which they shall intervene. The length of time adopted by the Conference varies in terms of the importance of the instrument under debate: one hour for instruments of lesser importance; three, four or even more hours for the most important instruments.
Before the general debate, procedural motions may be put to vote: one objection that a question is inadmissible and not more than one preliminary question. If they are carried the instrument is rejected. The closure of the general debate can be delayed by the discussion of a third procedural motion, the motion to refer the instrument back to the committee responsible, the effect of which, if carried, shall be to suspend debate until the committee presents a fresh report. The discussion of these three procedural motions is organised by the Rules of Procedure. For long, the speaking time of a speaker moving a procedural motion was not limited, which promoted the use of delaying strategies. Such strategies are now limited to multiplying the number of amendments, and having recourse to suspensions of sittings and to public ballots. This strategy is commonly described as ‘obstruction.’ In 1999, the National Assembly amended its Rules of Procedure with a view to limiting the speaking time of speakers moving a procedural motion (one and a half hours in first reading, thirty minutes in second reading and fifteen minutes for subsequent readings), the Chairmen’s’ Conference having the possibility of waiving this time limitation.
Any instrument, whether a government bill or a Member’s bill, comprises an ‘explanatory memorandum’ which presents the ‘purview’, drafted in articles, and which forms the rule-making part. Each deputy can intervene prior to the consideration of a clause. The Rules of Procedure (Article 95, paragraph 2) places a five minute limit on speeches. The President may invite the speaker to conclude or close the debate when two speakers of opposite opinion have spoken. When deputies wishing to intervene regarding a clause have spoken, and after the possible intervention of the Government and, if it so desires, of the committee responsible, amendments—if there are any—are debated. This is an essential phase of legislative debate. The so-called yellow document or ‘sitting unfolder’—dérouleur de séance published on the website is the main medium of debate, with the comparative table published at the end of the committee report. Amendments discussed in public sitting are made available to deputies in the form of collections in which they are classified according to the order by which they are called. Amendments are called by the President who works through from the general to the specific, from the repeal to a mere modification, paragraph by paragraph. The amendment differing most from the instrument is started with. To avoid amendments from being eradicated before being debated, Article 100, paragraph 6, of the Rules of Procedure authorises the President to submit mutually exclusive amendments to joint debate. Amendments are then put to vote in the regulatory order, but each will have been given its chance. This procedure, which has been merely summarised here, is based on an ideal approach to parliamentary debate where the confrontation of arguments is organised to enlighten those deliberating and prepare their decisions. Its complexity is increased by various factors such as the tabling of sub-amendments, and the seeking of leave to defer a clause for the purpose of rearranging the order of debate of clauses: to avoid premature decisions, the Assembly can defer its vote on a provision until the clause where it is mainly developed has been addressed. Leave to defer amendments may also be decided.
The Assembly votes on each amendment or sub-amendment, then on each article. Little by little its decisions build the instrument which emerges from its deliberations, on which it carries out a final vote, the vote on an instrument in its entirety. Voting takes place in several ways : - By a show of hands, which is the normal way of voting ‘on all matters other than personal appointments’, (Rule 64, paragraph 1, of the Rules of Procedure), - In case of doubt ‘by sitting and standing’, - By public ballot (by means of the electronic voting board equipping each deputy’s lectern), with publication of the breakdown of voters in the Official Gazette. Should an issue be made of the Government’s responsibility (Article 49 of the Constitution), the vote takes place at the rostrum. Article 27 of the Constitution sets forth that ‘The right to vote of Members of Parliament shall be personal.’ and ‘no member shall be given more than one proxy.’ These obligations are detailed by the institutional ordinance of 7 November 1958. The personal voting obligation was infringed for a long time. In its decision no 86-225 of 23 January 1987, the Constitutional Council endorsed the practice that had been followed since 1958 and allowed those absent to vote using the electronic voting system. In 1993, the National Assembly Bureau decided that, henceforth, only those present would vote, bearing in mind the possibility of voting by proxy under which no member can be given more than one proxy. Quorum In plenary sitting, the quorum, in other words the presence of the absolute majority of deputies, is not required to deliberate or determine the agenda (Rule 61, paragraph 1, of the Rules of Procedure). However, on personal request by the Chairman of a group, the President can be asked to establish—when a vote is being held—whether a quorum is present in the precincts of the National Assembly. When the quorum is not met, which is always the case otherwise the request would not have been made, the sitting is suspended after the President has announced that the ballot is to be deferred. The ballot cannot take place less than one hour later; it can also be deferred to the following sitting. The vote is then ‘valid whatever the number of deputies present.’ (Rule 61, paragraph 3). Second deliberation Before voting on an instrument in its entirety, the Assembly may be led, particularly on request by the Government or the committee responsible, to reconsider votes taken during the consideration of clauses. This procedure, which concerns a limited number of clauses, is not rare. The Rules of Procedure lay down that ‘If the Assembly rejects amendments moved in the second deliberation, this shall be deemed to confirm the decision taken by the Assembly in the first deliberation.’ (Rule 101, paragraph 4). Vote on an instrument in its entirety This is preceded by explanations of vote, for which a speaker from each group may intervene for five minutes. The committee and the Government may also wish to intervene. Where the vote on an instrument in its entirety is by public ballot, the Chairmen’s’ Conference can decide — generally at the request of a group Chairman — that it shall take place not at the end of the debate on the instrument but at a date it determines so that the greatest number of deputies can participate therein (Rule 65-1 of the Rules of Procedure). This is known as a postponed or a formal vote. FROM BILL TO ACT To better understand how laws are enacted, let’s follow the course taken by the text which became Act no. 2000-295 of 5 April 2000 on the limiting of multiple electoral mandates and of elective duties and on their conditions of exercise. This text — which was considered by Parliament at the same time as an institutional Act on the same subject —resulted from a Government bill which, after consideration by the Conseil d'État, was deliberated by the Council of Ministers on 8 April 1998, and tabled on the same day at the National Assembly Bureau.
This bill comprising 15 articles was referred for substantive consideration to the Constitutional Acts, Legislation and General Administration Committee which, after having heard various personalities, concluded its work on 19 May by adopting a report proposing the adoption of 21 amendments. The text was considered by the National Assembly in public sitting — at the same time as the institutional text—on 26, 27 and 28 May, during 4 sittings during which 149 amendments or sub-amendments were brought before the Assembly: it adopted 47 of them, including 21 from the Committee. At the end of this first reading at the Assembly, only 2 articles of the bill were voted without amendment ; 1 article was repealed and 16 were added. The bill amended by the Assembly was transmitted to the Senate by the Prime Minister and was considered there by the Constitutional Acts, Legislation, Voting, Rules of Procedure and General Administration Committee, on 21 October 1998, following which the Committee adopted amendments affecting 26 of the 31 articles of the text passed by the Assembly. Submitted in plenary sitting to the Senate on 27, 28 and 29 October 1998 in first reading, the text was the subject of 37 amendments of which 33 were adopted, all Committee amendments. Four articles were passed without amendment, in other words the Assembly text; 10 were amended; 17 were repealed (only 1 was the subject of an identical repeal). The shuttle continued by a second reading in each assembly, as the Government had not declared the matter urgent. This reading took place on 4 March 1999 at the National Assembly: of the 95 amendments brought before it, it adopted 51, of which 45 had been moved by its committee, and it accepted the repeal of 4 articles, and introduced 6 new ones. On 19 October 1999 it was the turn of the Senate, before which were brought 35 amendments to the text passed by the Assembly in second reading. All the amendments were adopted, of which 32 had been moved by its Committee. Following the shuttle, 8 articles were passed in identical terms by the two assemblies, 1 was repealed and 26 remained under discussion. On 27 October, by a letter sent to the President of each assembly, the Prime Minister decided to convene a joint committee, composed of an equal number of members from each assembly, on the provisions still under discussion, in accordance with Article 45, paragraph 2, of the Constitution. Composed of 7 deputies and 7 senators and as many alternates, this joint committee met at the Palais-Bourbon on 9 December 1999. It noted its failure, in other words the fact that it was impossible for it to achieve a joint text on the provisions still under discussion. In accordance with Article 45, paragraph 4, of the Constitution, the Government asked the two assemblies to carry out a further reading of the bill. The Assembly did so on 8 February 2000, on the basis of the text amended by the Senate in second reading. 79 amendments were brought before it, of which it adopted 33, 30 being amendments by its legislation committee. On 2 March 2000, the Senate considered the text adopted this way by the Assembly, which it rejected when voting on the text in its entirety. In accordance with Article 45, paragraph 4, the Prime Minister asked the National Assembly, in a letter sent on 3 March 2000 to its President, to make a final decision on the text as adopted by it in the new reading. This final reading took place on 8 March 2000. The text adopted this way by the National Assembly was submitted to the consideration of the Constitutional Council before which it was brought by more than sixty deputies and more than sixty senators. Its decision (no. 2000-426 DC) was given on 30 March 2000 and declares that two articles as well as parts of seven articles are contrary to the Constitution. The Act, amended this way, was promulgated by the President of the Republic on 5 April 2000 and published in the Official Gazette of 6 April. It comprises 34 articles, in other words 19 more than the initial Government text, only two articles having been passed without any amendment with respect to the initial text. SUCCESSIVE CONSIDERATION OF BILLS
Before it is finally adopted by Parliament, a bill must be passed in identical terms by the two assemblies. For this purpose, as set forth by article 45, paragraph 1, of the Constitution, any government bill or Member’s bill is considered successively in the two assemblies with a view to the adoption of an identical text. Each consideration by an assembly is called a reading. The normal procedure therefore consists in the text shuttling between the two assemblies, each being called on to consider and, possibly, amend the text adopted by the other. The shuttle comes to an end when one assembly adopts without any amendment the text previously adopted by the other assembly. This is known as a vote conforme (identical vote). The shuttle remains the most current procedure for the adoption of laws, approximately two-thirds of them being passed without recourse to the conciliatory procedure instituted by the joint committee composed of an equal number of members from each assembly.
In order to limit the number of readings, the 1958 Constitution introduced, in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 45, a conciliatory procedure between the two assemblies which takes the form of an intervention by a joint committee composed of an equal number of members from each assembly. This committee, composed of seven members and seven alternates from each assembly, is tasked with seeking an agreement on the texts considered by them and proposing, where possible, a joint text on the provisions still under discussion. When the Senate and the National Assembly have not been able to pass an identical text after two readings, or after only one if the Government has declared the matter to be urgent (Article 45, paragraph 2, of the Constitution), the Prime Minister may ‘convene a joint committee, composed of an equal number of members from each assembly, to propose a text on the provisions still under discussion.’ (Article 45, paragraph 2). These joint committees sit alternately at the Palais-Bourbon and at the Palais du Luxembourg. For each clause still under discussion, the joint committee seeks a common solution which may moreover be the purview adopted by one of the assemblies. When no common solution has been found to one of the provisions still under discussion, disagreement is noted and therefore the failure of the joint committee. In the event of an agreement on the text of the Government bill or Member’s bill still under discussion, the Government may decide to submit it to the two assemblies. If they approve it one after the other with, where applicable, amendments—which are admissible only with the agreement of the Government—the text is finally adopted. If the joint committee fails, or if the joint text has not been adopted, the joint committee episode is closed. The shuttle resumes with a reading in each assembly. After this further reading, the Government may ask the National Assembly to make a final decision. The Constitution defines very precisely the procedures for this last vote. Some texts cannot be dealt with by the joint committee procedure. ‘Institutional Acts relating to the Senate must be passed in identical terms by the two assemblies.’ (Article 46, paragraph 4, of the Constitution). Constitutional Acts, after having been adopted in identical terms by the two assemblies, are submitted to referendum. However, a bill to amend the Constitution shall not be submitted to referendum where the President of the Republic decides to submit it to Parliament convened in Congress; such a bill shall be approved only if adopted by a three-fifths majority of the votes cast. Final enactment of law The passing of a text by the two assemblies or the intervention of the National Assembly in the final reading does not mark the end of the legislative procedure: for a law to be enacted, a few mandatory or optional steps still remain to be crossed. ENACTMENT OF LAW As a rule, the parliamentary phase of the legislative procedure is closed by the adoption of a government bill or a Member’s bill in identical terms by the two assemblies or, in the event of disagreement between them, by the National Assembly alone, in the final reading. This normally leads to the promulgation of the Act, which is then published. Promulgation may however be delayed or prevented in two cases: owing to the checking of the conformity of an Act with the Constitution or when a further deliberation takes place. 1. Review of constitutionality The Constitutional Council—an institution composed of nine members of whom a third are replaced every three years—is in particular tasked with reviewing the constitutionality of Acts passed by Parliament (Articles 61 et 62 of the Constitution). Three of its members are appointed by the President of the Republic, three by the President of the Senate and three by the President of the National Assembly. This review takes place ex officio for so-called institutional Acts, expressly referred to as such by the Constitution and which are aimed at applying constitutional provisions. For ordinary statutes, on the other hand, this review is made only on request by some authorities: President of the Republic, Prime Minister, President of the Senate, President of the National Assembly and, since the amendment of the Constitution in 1974, sixty deputies or sixty senators. Reference to the Council must be made within the time limit for promulgation; it suspends said time limit. When Acts are referred to the Council it has one month to make a ruling or eight days if the Government so requests. Its decisions shall be binding on all and no appeal shall lie therefrom. When the Council declares an Act to be in conformity with the Constitution, it can be promulgated. In contrast, a decision declaring the entirety of an Act not to be in conformity with the Constitution shall prevent its promulgation. The legislative procedure which has led to the adoption of such an Act is nullified and there is no other solution but to resume it from the beginning, unless the reason for non-conformity forms a decisive obstacle supposing, for instance, a prior amendment of the Constitution itself. The Council may also decide that an Act is partly in conformity with the Constitution. In this case, the Act can be promulgated except for its articles or parts of articles declared unconstitutional. 2. Reconsideration Within the promulgation time limit, the President of the Republic can ask for a reconsideration of an Act, particularly to remedy a declaration of unconstitutionality (Article 10, paragraph 2, of the Constitution). This procedure, which has been used only twice since 1958, is initiated by a decree of the President of the Republic countersigned by the Prime Minister. The promulgation time limit is suspended. A complementary phase of the legislative procedure then opens, Parliament being asked to resume, totally or partially, the consideration of the bill it has just adopted: this complementary phase follows, apart from a few exceptions, the above-described ordinary legislative procedure (tabling of the bill, shuttle and, where applicable, conciliatory procedure, and lastly, final adoption). 3. Promulgation When the Act is fit to be promulgated, the Secretariat-General of the Government is tasked with presenting the bill for signature by the President of the Republic who is empowered to promulgate Acts, making them legally binding. The President of the Republic shall sign the promulgation decree within fifteen days (Article 10, paragraph1, of the Constitution). 4. Publication After its promulgation, the Act is published in the Official Gazette (Laws and Decrees edition [édition Lois et Décrets]). Its implementation is subject to its publication.
The Act bears
the date of its promulgation, preceded by two series of figures; those of
the year of promulgation and the sequence number in the series of acts and
regulatory decrees published in the year in question. (Example: Act
no. 2000-1354 of
30 December
2000
facilitating compensation for convicted persons recognised as innocent and
containing various coordinating provisions as regards criminal procedure,
published in the Official Gazette of 31 December 2000).
Instituted in 1991, then amended in 1998, this procedure, organised by Rules 103 to 107 of the Rules of Procedure, is aimed at lightening the Assembly’s work load in plenary sitting, by shortening certain phases of the debate and by promoting preparatory debate in committee. Consideration of a bill by this procedure is initiated by the rapporteur of the committee responsible, speaking for ten minutes, followed, where applicable, by the rapporteur of any committee asked for an opinion, speaking for five minutes. In the ensuing general debate no more than one speaker per group may intervene, each for five minutes. Bills for which this procedure is chosen cannot be the subject of procedural motions. Where amendments have been moved, the President calls only those clauses to which amendments have been moved; he puts to the vote any amendments, the clauses to which they relate and the entire bill. Leave to speak is limited: it is not accepted to enter names of deputies seeking leave to speak regarding clauses called and, regarding amendments, there is no possibility of answering the Government and the committee. Where the bill is not the subject of any amendment, the President puts the entirety of the bill to vote after the general debate. Implementation of this procedure implies a certain consensus: it is adopted only if no opposition has arisen, at the Chairmen’s Conference, to a request made in this respect by the President of the Assembly, by the Government, by the Chairman of the committee responsible or by the Chairman of a group.
|
See also files
