The president of the Laws Commission of the National Assembly, Yaël Braun-Pivet (The Republic on the march), considers Tuesday November 10 that the Constitutional Council “Has every interest in evolving” in its practices and its composition, after several censures by the high court.
“All our institutions are adapting and the Constitutional Council has every interest in changing too, given the change in its practices and referrals. This is the only way, moreover, to protect him from criticism when he is increasingly under attack in the light of his decisions ”, said Yaël Braun-Pivet in Le Figaro.
The president of the Law Commission considers that there are “Operations that we cannot be satisfied with”, commenting more broadly on the episode of his bill on the follow-up of persons convicted of terrorist acts leaving prison, which had been rebutted in part by the Constitutional Council last summer.
Have a “contradictory exchange”
Boasting “The perfect archetype of parliamentary work”, she particularly regretted not having been able to defend her text in front of the Sages of the rue de Montpensier during a “Adversarial proceedings in open court”.
Or “This dialogue with parliamentarians and this contradictory exchange are necessary”, argues the member for Yvelines, lawyer by profession.
She also pleads in hollow for “A professionalization of the Constitutional Council by the appointment of more jurists and magistrates and the end of the archaic appointment of the Presidents of the Republic as members”.
“Guarantee this institution”
If Yaël Braun-Pivet takes care to defend “A superior rule of law, guardian of our values, without it being able to be called into question when a decision of the Constitutional Council is not appropriate”, she also throws several banderillas.
“To guarantee this institution, it must be unassailable in its functioning and procedures and that everyone, the legislator as the Constitutional Council, remains in his place”, explains the president of the Law Commission.
In addition to the proposed law on “Security measures” for terrorists leaving prison, the Sages had also censored a few weeks earlier the heart of the Avia bill on online hate.
– .
