During the celebration of the 65th anniversary of the Fifth Republic, the longevity and vitality of the Constitution was explained by its ability to adapt to all political situations, such as the alternation of right and left or cohabitation. The fundamental issue highlighted by the authors of the study is to guarantee the continuity of public policies and thus the effectiveness of public action. They show the evolution of institutions, the nuances of political practices, raise numerous questions, but do not question the legitimacy of maintaining France’s system under the Fifth Republic.
Conceived as an alternative form of democratic representation, the random selection of citizens for a political task comes in tension with the logic of electoral representation. The idea, carried by random selection, that anyone can be a good enough representative challenges the assumption that we need to choose the most competent among ourselves. And the fact that citizens' assemblies are sometimes tasked to draft legislation may undermine the authority of elected representatives. This article tests this hypothesis of tension between competing forms of representation on a recent case: the French Citizen Convention for Climate (CCC) in 2020. Drawing on parliamentary hearings and questions as well as public political reactions to the CCC, we find indications that elected representatives may feel threatened in their legitimacy even when most randomly selected citizens do not see themselves as representatives. This may be due to the fact that the CCC was seen by some as stepping on the prerogatives of the Parliament. This suggests that future experiments of the sort could benefit from a clearer functional division between the two forms of representation.
Cet article fait le point sur la jurisprudence du Conseil constitutionnel relative au droit d’amendement des parlementaires aux projets de loi de finances. Il s’attarde plus spécialement sur l’émergence progressive, depuis quelques années, d’un contrôle du caractère effectif de ce droit d’amendement, jurisprudence dont la portée demeure incertaine.
