No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Note on the Revision of the Constitution of the Fourth Republic
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
Extract
Recent political developments in France, particularly the dissolution of the National Assembly and the subsequent elections of January 2, 1956, overshadowed one of the most interesting and long-awaited enactments of the second legislature of the Fourth Republic. A law of November 30, 1954, passed by the National Assembly by the required two-thirds majority, realized the revision of the constitution of the Fourth Republic. The law was the culmination of debates that had begun when the new constitution was framed. One might indeed say that constitutional reform was advocated throughout the whole period of the Third Republic, and in 1945 the French people overwhelmingly expressed themselves in favor of a constituent assembly to frame a new republican constitution. Yet when the document was drafted and submitted to the people it was received with great apathy and endorsed on October 13, 1946, by a minority of the registered voters. No sooner had it been put into force than the movement for reform recommenced, and various leaders like DeGaulle, Reynaud, Mendès-France, Laniel and Bidault joined the eminent statesmen of the Third Republic in proclaiming the need for further revision. Perhaps no better evidence testifies to the inherent instability of the French body politic than this perennial dissatisfaction with the basic instrument of government.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Political Science Association 1956
References
1 For background material see Pierce's, Roy “France Reopens the Constitutional Debate,” this Review, June, 1952 Google Scholar; Boivin-Champeaux, Jean, “Peut-On Reviser la Constitution?” Revue des Deux Mondes, April, 1952 Google Scholar; Berlia, George, “Le Projet de revision constitutionelle adopté par l'Assemblè Nationale le 23 juillet, 1953,” Revue du Droit Public et de la Science Politique en France et à l'Etranger, juillet-septembre, 1953, pp. 680–696 Google Scholar. For a commentary which, however, deals at length with the procedure for amending the Constitution, see Goguel, F., Revue Francaise de la Science Politique, “La Revision Constitutionelle de 1954,” juillet-septembre, 1955, pp. 485–502 Google Scholar. Since writing this I have come across Pierce's, Roy “Constitutional Revision in France,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 17, pp. 221–247 (May, 1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 The demand for reform became even more pronounced as time went on. In 1953, four Prime Ministers, Designated Reynaud, Mendès-France, Bidault, and Marie, failed to receive the requisite absolute majority after putting the question of constitutional reform and the need of legislation by decree at the forefront of their program. Annèe Politique, 1953, p. 42 and pp. 484–514 Google Scholar.
3 The projected revision, involving eleven articles, was formally agreed upon on November 14, 1950. On November 30, of the same year, the project was introduced in the National Assembly and received a favorable vote, 369 to 181. On January 26, 1951, the bill for constitutional reform with amendments cleared the Council of the Republic by 295 to 17 votes and was subsequently referred to the Committee on Universal Suffrage of the National Assembly. It remained there until July 23, 1953, when it was passed on first reading by the National Assembly by 468 to 127 votes. It then passed the Council of the Republic by 240 to 74 votes. After a number of postponements it reached the floor of the National Assembly again and passed on November 30, 1954.
4 The literature on this subject is quite extensive. For background material, see particularly Blum, Lèon, La Reforme Gouvernmentale (1919)Google Scholar; Capitant, R., Le Crise du Parlementarisme (1934)Google Scholar; Haikal, Y., La Dissolution de la Chambre des Deputès (1935)Google Scholar. For the period since the adoption of the Constitution of the Fourth Republic, see: Meyer, Jacques, “Constitution et Assemblèe,” Revue de la Defense Nationale, dècembre, 1951 Google Scholar; Guetzevitch, Boris Mirkine, “La Revision Constitutionelle,” Revue Politique et Parlementaire, dècembre, 1951 Google Scholar. For one of the parliamentary debates, see: “Proposition de resolution tendant à decider la revision des articles 30, 45, 46, 51, 52 et Titre VI de la Constitution pour assurer la stabilitè ministerielle,” Journal Officiel de la Rèpublique Francaise—Documents Parlementaires—Assemblèe Nationale, Annexe No. 9048, 3 août, 1954.
5 The Bureau of the National Assembly is composed of one President, six Vice Presidents, fourteen Secretaries, and three questeurs. The functions of the secretaries and the questeurs are purely routine—the counting of votes, the supervision of physical arrangements, etc. The President, however, and the six Vice Presidents preside over the sessions of the Assembly. The new constitutional revision makes it possible to elect the whole Bureau by majority vote and thus exclude members of the two extreme political groups, provided, of course, that the center groups can agree among themselves on a slate.
6 Immediately after the formation of the Laniel government in June, 1953, and the adjournment of the Parliament, Communists and Socialists demanded an extraordinary session for the purpose of discussing some of the economic reforms promulgated by decree. Annèe Politique, 1953, p. 61 ffGoogle Scholar.
7 Gallichon, G., “Aspects de la Procedure Legislative en France,” Revue Francaise de Science Politique, No. 4, 1954, pp. 795–809 Google Scholar.
8 Annèe Politique, 1953, pp. 484–490 Google Scholar.
9 Revue de Paris, “Juillet, 1948” août, 1948. The revision of articles 13 and 51 was also specifically contemplated by Mendès-France, Bidault, and Marie, who failed to receive the requisite investiture vote and by Laniel, who became Prime Minister in June, 1953.
10 Article 45 (Simple Majority for Investiture):
Old Text
“2) (the President of the Council Designate) shall submit to the National Assembly the program and the policy of the Cabinet he intends to constitute.”
“3) The President of the Council and the Ministers may not be appointed until the President of the Council receives a vote of confidence from the National Assembly by public ballot and by an absolute majority of the Deputies, except in case a force majeure shall prevent the National Assembly from meeting.”
“4) The same procedure shall be followed during the term of the legislature in the event of a vacancy caused by death, resignation or any other circumstance, except in the case set forth in Article 52 below.”
New Text
“(the President of the Council Designate) shall choose the members of his Cabinet and submit the list to the National Assembly; he shall then appear before this body to obtain a vote of confidence on the program and the policy which he intends to pursue, except in case a force majeure shall prevent the National Assembly from meeting.”
“The vote shall be taken by public ballot and by a majority of the votes cast.”
“The same procedure shall be followed during the term of the legislature in the event of a vacancy of the Presidency of the Council, except in the case set forth in Article 52.”
11 Yet, though the revised article was in force when the Mendćs-France government fell in February, 1955, it took twenty days for a new Cabinet to be formed. Pinay, Pflimlin, and Pineau tried in vain before Edgar Faure succeeded. M. Goguel suspects that the effect of the revision will be to transform the abstention votes into votes against a Cabinet.
12 See Lidderdale, D. W. D., The Parliament of France, 1951 Google Scholar.
13 The old and new texts of articles 14 and 20 follow:
Article 14 (Introduction of Bills)
Old Text
“2) Bills introduced by members of the National Assembly shall be filed with its Secretariat.”
“3) Bills introduced by members of the Council of the Republic shall be filed with its Secretariat and sent without debate to the Secretariat of the National Assembly. They shall not be admissible if they might result in the reduction of revenues or the creation of new expenditures.”
New Text
“Bills are filed with the Secretariat of the National Assembly or the Secretariat of the Council of the Republic. However, bills tending to authorize the ratification of the treaties provided for in Article 27, budgetary or financial bills and bills resulting in the reduction of revenues or the creation of new expenditures must be filed with the Secretariat of the National Assembly.”
“Bills introduced by members of Parliament are filed with the Secretariat of the Chamber to which the latter belong and sent, after adoption, to the other Chamber. Bills introduced by members of the Council of the Republic are not admissible if they might result in the reduction of revenues or the creation of new expenditures.”
Article 20 (Powers of the Council of the Republic)
Old Text
“1) The Council of the Republic shall examine, in order to give its opinion thereon, the bills passed on first reading by the National Assembly.”
“2) It shall give its opinion not more than two months after receipt of each bill sent it by the National Assembly. When the Budget Law shall be under discussion, this period may be reduced, if need be, to the time taken by the National Assembly for its consideration and vote. When the National Assembly shall have adopted a rule for emergency procedure, the Council of the Republic shall give its opinion within the same period of time as that provided for debate in the National Assembly by the rule of that body. The time limits specified in the present Article shall be suspended during recesses of the session. They may be extended by a decision of the National Assembly.”
“3) Should the opinion of the Council of the Republic be in agreement with that of the National Assembly or should it not have been given within the time limits specified in the preceding paragraph, the law shall be promulgated in the text as voted by the National Assembly.”
“4) Should the opinion of the Council of the Republic not be in agreement with that of the National Assembly, the latter body shall examine the bill on second reading. It shall dispose definitively and absolutely of the amendments proposed by the Council of the Republic, accepting or rejecting them in whole or in part. Should these amendments be totally or partially rejected, the second reading of the bill shall be voted upon by public ballot and by an absolute majority of the members of the National Assembly whenever the vote on the whole bill has been taken under the same conditions by the Council of the Republic.”
New Text
“All bills shall be examined successively by both Chambers of Parliament, in view of securing the adoption of an identical text.”
“Unless it has examined the bill on first reading, the Council of the Republic shall pronounce itself not more than two months after receipt of the text adopted on first reading by the National Assembly. Each of the two Assemblies shall, if necessary, continue to examine the bill until an agreement has been reached. The text shall then be promulgated in accordance with the procedure set forth in Article 36. Should no agreement be reached within a period of one hundred days reckoning from the day on which the bill has been submitted by the National Assembly to the Council of the Republic for a second reading, the last text adopted by the National Assembly shall be considered to be definite and ready for promulgation.”
“With regard to budgetary texts and financial laws, this period shall not exceed the time previously taken by the National Assembly for its consideration and vote.”
“Should the National Assembly adopt a rule of urgent procedure, the time limit shall be double that provided for debate in the National Assembly by the rule of that body.”
“5) The time limits set forth in the present Article shall be suspended during recesses. They may be extended by a decision of the National Assembly.”
14 “The absolute majority rule, instead of being exceptional, has been frequently invoked: nearly a tenth of all the bills passed in the 1946–51 legislature were amended or rejected in the Council by an absolute majority.” Williams, Philip, Politics in Post-War France, p. 283 Google Scholar. Some of these bills, the author adds rightly, were of “first-class importance.”
15 Fauvet, Jacques in Le Monde, December 1, 1954 Google Scholar.
16 The Cabinet of Guy Mollet, for example, includes the highest number of Senators—eight—of whom one is a Minister and the others are Secretaries of State.
17 For instance, the sliding wage scale was “blocked” by the Council in 1950, with the full knowledge and the cooperation of the Cabinet. In December, 1947, and in August, 1948, the Council restored to the form desired by the Cabinet two bills of major importance. Philip Williams, Politics in Post-War France.
18 This was clearly illustrated in the case of the Bidault Cabinet which almost had its loi de finance defeated by an absolute majority at the hands of the Council. To avert the recurrence of the same situation, Bidault promptly invited the leader of the Radical Senators to join his Cabinet. Ibid., p. 281.