All eyes will be on him. The Constitutional Council will make its decisions on the pension reform on Friday April 14. Three scenarios are on the table, from the probable rejection of certain measures to complete censorship, via a first step towards a referendum. Overview.
Pro-reformers and opponents alike expect some of the bill’s measures to fall by the wayside. Among the proposals in jeopardy is the senior index, which should force large companies to declare employees over the age of 55, but could constitute a legal rider. The index should however be fished out in a future bill. The experimentation of a new CDI at the end of his career is also threatened.
Partial censorship would be a lesser evil for the executive, who could argue that the core of the reactor – the postponement of the legal age to 64 – is validated. “The Council would go in the direction it has always been”, namely “not to counter major social or societal reforms”, believes Lauréline Fontaine, professor of constitutional law and author of The Abused Constitution (Amsterdam).
“If there is censorship of points […], but not of 64 years, then that will in no way respond to social conflict,” warned CFDT General Secretary Laurent Berger. Left-wing elected officials have already announced that they will continue to demand the withdrawal of the reform. On paper, a complete validation of the bill, without any censorship, is also possible, but unlikely, according to several constitutional experts interviewed.
The opponents of the text claim it, and invoke in particular a diversion of the spirit of the Constitution by the executive. To pass the reform, he used an amending budget from the Secu, which limited the duration of parliamentary debates. A choice “motivated by no other reason than that of opportunity”, rebuked PS deputy Jérôme Guedj, who also mentioned “insincere” debates, in particular on the revaluation of small pensions.
Élina Lemaire, professor of public law at the University of Burgundy, subscribes to certain arguments, but remains circumspect about a rejection for “misappropriation” of procedure: “The Council should somehow go and scrutinize the conscience of the government, which which he always refused to do. »
“It is not because the procedure is unusual that it should be censored”, considers the constitutionalist Didier Maus. He raises for his part potential “constitutional traps”: if the Sages considered that the reform worsens the situation of women or certain long careers, and that there is a “break in equality”.
This could lead to a big slash in the sections of the bill. There remains the hypothesis of a strong act of the Sages. In 1971, they had dramatically widened their field of action by placing themselves as guarantors of fundamental freedoms. But half a century later, they are still accused by some lawyers of docility towards the executive. “There could again be the opportunity for an institutional coup, by placing ourselves as guardians of the Constitution in front of the executive”, cautiously advances Élina Lemaire.
The Sages could do a double blow: not censor the essentials of the reform, and validate the procedure of referendum of shared initiative (RIP) of the left. Its initiators want to submit a bill to a national consultation so that the retirement age cannot exceed 62 years. The required conditions seem to be met (signatures of parliamentarians, scope of the proposal, etc.), and the green light for the RIP is “probable”, considers Lauréline Fontaine.
Jean-Éric Schoettl, former secretary general of the Constitutional Council, and Jean-Pierre Camby, associate professor at the University of Paris-Saclay, however warn in Le Figaro: the injunction of a starting age which “cannot be fixed over 62” could “bind future law” and make the Elders wince.
Even in the event of validation, the road remains long. The proposal would have to collect 4.8 million citizen signatures in nine months, and not be examined during the following six months by the National Assembly and the Senate, for it to be submitted to a referendum. It remains to be seen what Emmanuel Macron would decide if this prospect took shape on the evening of April 14. Some on the left call on him to imitate the former President of the Republic Jacques Chirac, who had promulgated but never applied the CPE (first job contract), fought by the street.
