The social and political crisis is bogged down. The Covid-19, the war in Ukraine, inflation and then a pension reform that shines by its unpopularity… All the elements were there. By using article 49-3 of the Constitution and by engaging the responsibility of her government on such a controversial text, Elisabeth Borne has thrown a match on a haystack which did not ask for more to ignite.
Since this event, part of the people have not been angry and, from north to south, a sentence resounds in the streets: “Macron resignation”. Only, such an option does not seem to be emerging in the plans of the Head of State. Faced with this, some French claim the use of a very specific procedure of the Constitution of the Fifth Republic, article 68, aimed at dismissing the President of the Republic.
These demands find echoes on the far right of the political spectrum, in the mouth of the deputy of Essonne and former candidate Debout la France in the presidential election, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan. “France is too fragile to continue to have so many inequalities, so much injustice, so much financial waste, we have to take a break and start again on a sound basis, otherwise we won’t be able to last four years. Me, I would initiate the dismissal of this dangerous man”, he declared at the microphone of Europe 1 on April 6, 2023.
But in reality, would such a procedure have any chance of succeeding? It is therefore article 68 of the Constitution which governs it, it provides:
Some Internet users argue on social networks that the pension reform, the rise in energy prices or even the so-called “depression” of Emmanuel Macron (as stated by the president of the UPR François Asselineau) are sufficient shortcomings. But the reality is much more complex.
If the formula of article 68 of the Constitution remains unclear, Didier Maus, member of the Avril commission, which inspired the constitutional revision of 2007, explains in the columns of Liberation that “there is no question here of judging the policy pursued by a President but to appreciate his role as guardian of the Constitution”.
“All the difficulty with this kind of legal category is that there is no pre-established list. At some point, you have to consider that you are facing a breach incompatible with the exercise of your duties” , adds Jean-Eric Gicquel, professor of constitutional and parliamentary law at Rennes-1 University at 20 Minutes.
Since the constitutional revision of 2007, an impeachment procedure has been proposed only once, in 2016, against François Hollande. At the time, the LR deputies behind the dismissal accused the Head of State of the confidences he had made to journalists concerned with “national defense”.
But the request had finally been rejected by the office of the National Assembly which considered it inadmissible, “not justifying reasons likely to characterize a breach”. A procedure of this scale is deliberately complex and must go through several stages before being validated.
For impeachment proceedings to be completed, a proposal for a meeting of Parliament in the High Court must first be tabled by at least 58 MPs. It is then studied by the office of the National Assembly which rules on its admissibility, goes before the law commission and finally be brought before the vote of the deputies and then the senators.
If it is adopted by a two-thirds majority, Parliament then meets in the High Court, presided over by the President of the National Assembly. The President of the Republic can then be heard before the High Court and a vote by secret ballot is then organised. If two-thirds of the members are in favour, the Head of State is then dismissed.
A scenario that therefore seems very unlikely in the current situation.
