The highest administrative court gave a very critical opinion with regard to the text presented by the government, which suggests harsh and long future debates.
Since December, the pension reform project has thrown many French people on the street. Presented on Friday January 24 in the Council of Ministers, the text will soon be debated in the National Assembly. A phase which is likely to be complicated, as the text of the bill still conceals inaccuracies, as pointed out by the Council of State in an opinion given Friday.
The highest French administrative court, which had three weeks to study the text on the form and to make sure that it did not contain contradictions, nor illegal or unconstitutional measures, indeed gave a very critical opinion. What to fear long and difficult debates in the coming weeks. Franceinfo recalls what this opinion, to say the least worried, of the Council of State foreshadows.
(Again) text changes
Constitutional law specialist Didier Maus, interviewed by franceinfo, considered the advice of the Council of State. What he retains is first of all an observation: the proceedings ran out of time. “The Council of State has had about three weeks to examine very complex texts. Its opinion takes up the project point by point and examines, for each of the proposed reforms, both what it contains and the legal difficulties it But he very clearly deplores not having had the time to carry out all the necessary expertise “, enlightens the constitutional expert. “The Council of State explains here that it is not in a position to provide the government with all the legal certainty that it can expect.”
Lack of time, complexity of texts, changes along the way … With this text, “we cumulate the difficulties”, notes the specialist, who lists: “A fundamental question which, in itself, is extremely complex since it is a question of overhauling the pension system established in 1945. And a difficulty in timing, since the preparation phase was long and we see although it has not been exhaustive. The government has not yet completed its project, which has encountered real social difficulties “, explains Didier Maus.
Result: the text soon submitted to the deputies will probably undergo important modifications, in particular to clarify the elements of the reform (such as funding) judged “Sketchy” by the Council of State. “The government has taken into account a certain number of remarks. There are, moreover, in the opinion itself editorial changes which have certainly been incorporated into the draft tabled on the desk of the National Assembly.”
On other points, the government takes the risk that there will be constitutional difficulties along the way or at the end of the journey.at franceinfo
“Of course, the State Council does not rule on the advisability of a universal retirement system and on the advisability of measures such as the pivotal age. But there are enough legal difficulties [dans le projet de loi] to largely provide the debate “, He continues. Moreover, “the government’s text is not complete since it notably misses the problem of term financing, through the nation of pivotal age”.
A calendar probably extended
The executive has scheduled the legislative process to be completed in the summer, late June or early July. However, given the complexity of the reform and its construction, Parliament must prepare for a marathon. In its opinion, the Council of State notably noted the problem posed by the large number of orders provided by the executive (29). Now,” It is not abnormal that a project as technical as this one contains twenty-nine authorizations to authorize orders, we will have to look at them one by one and see if each of these authorizations corresponds to the constitutional framework which follows from the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Council “, explains Didier Maus.
The constitutional expert recalls that “It is not the role of the Council of State to say that the parliamentary calendar is too short or that it should be lengthened”. But, in view of the remarks made on Friday, he warns: the legislative work “will take a long time”.
Reinforced opposition
Unions and politicians opposed to the pension reform welcomed the advice of the State Council on Saturday 25 January. “On form and substance, the Council of State fully confirms what we have been saying from the start. There is a real problem with the legal consistency of the text”, reacted Saturday to AFP François Hommeril, the president of CFE-CGC. Same criticism on Europe 1 from Yves Veyrier, the secretary general of Force Ouvrière, for whom “the government has absolutely no control over its subject”. “In polite terms, the State Council says that this badly constructed project must be thrown in the trash. And it is not the financing conference that will change things”, noted Eric Beynel of Solidaires.
“It’s obvious that the opinion goes to serve, from a political point of view, to those who say that the government improvises, or in any case that it did not go far enough in the reflection and the development of a text, not consensual, but a coherent text “, Didier Maus notes, while calls to withdraw the text have multiplied on social networks since Friday evening.
The opinion will serve as a point of support both for those who criticize the project and, in some cases, for those who support it, because on certain points, the Council of State is entirely in the direction of the government .at franceinfo
The quest for a (very difficult) simplification
On the merits, the opinion of the Council of State points to the need to propose a clearer reform. “The Council of State returns several times to this notion of clarity, sincerity, exemplarity. The pension reform must be understandable by those for whom it is intended”, continues Didier Maus. “Future retirees will need to know clearly what their pension entitlement is. There is a predictable legibility in the current system that cannot be found in the system proposed by the bill. above, there may be improvements in the parliamentary debate “, he believes.
Anyway, the text, once validated by the Parliament, will return to the hands of the Council of State. He will then be able to assess whether or not the problems raised in his first opinion have found their solutions.
–
