Specificity of the interpretation of constitutionality in the Fifth Republic in France

Dar’ya B Kalish
{"title":"Specificity of the interpretation of constitutionality in the Fifth Republic in France","authors":"Dar’ya B Kalish","doi":"10.21128/1812-7126-2021-3-125-140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In France, the understanding of the constitutionality of law and the wider institution of constitutional control have interesting features, especially when compared to other countries that use the traditional, legal European (Kelsen’s) model. These include the originality of the standard, against which legislative acts are checked. It is the so-called constitutional bloc, which, in addition to the 1958 Constitution itself, includes the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen of 1789, the Preamble to the 1946 Constitution, the 2004 Environmental Charter, as well as the principles to which the Constitutional Council attaches constitutional significance. A feature of French public law in accordance with the 1958 Constitution is the non-universal legislative competence of parliament and the delimitation of the areas of regulation of law and regulations (government acts). In this regard, one of the requirements for the constitutionality of the law in France is that it should not interfere with the sphere of regulatory power, that is, it should not touch upon issues that are not attributed to the subject of legislative regulation by the Constitution. However, Parliament’s violation of the delimitation of legislative and regulatory regulation established by the Constitution does not include the unconstitutionality of the corresponding law (its individual provisions), instead only allowing the Government to amend them by its decrees. For a long time in France, there was only preliminary constitutional control over laws, legislative proposals submitted to a referendum, regulations of the chambers of Parliament and international treaties. As a result of the 2008 constitutional reform, a specific, subsequent constitutional review was introduced. It can be initiated in the Constitutional Council by the Court of Cassation or the Council of State upon an appeal, respectively, by a court of general jurisdiction or an administrative court, before which a statement is made that the law being applied to the dispute under consideration violates constitutionally guaranteed human rights. The institution of subsequent constitutional review has proved to be in great demand, and currently, most of the Constitutional Council’s decisions are made within its framework. In modern France, the development of legislation is significantly influenced by EU law. However, neither the Constitutional Council nor the Council of State directly monitor the compliance of laws and regulations with international treaties and EU law.","PeriodicalId":113514,"journal":{"name":"Sravnitel noe konstitucionnoe obozrenie","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sravnitel noe konstitucionnoe obozrenie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21128/1812-7126-2021-3-125-140","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In France, the understanding of the constitutionality of law and the wider institution of constitutional control have interesting features, especially when compared to other countries that use the traditional, legal European (Kelsen’s) model. These include the originality of the standard, against which legislative acts are checked. It is the so-called constitutional bloc, which, in addition to the 1958 Constitution itself, includes the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen of 1789, the Preamble to the 1946 Constitution, the 2004 Environmental Charter, as well as the principles to which the Constitutional Council attaches constitutional significance. A feature of French public law in accordance with the 1958 Constitution is the non-universal legislative competence of parliament and the delimitation of the areas of regulation of law and regulations (government acts). In this regard, one of the requirements for the constitutionality of the law in France is that it should not interfere with the sphere of regulatory power, that is, it should not touch upon issues that are not attributed to the subject of legislative regulation by the Constitution. However, Parliament’s violation of the delimitation of legislative and regulatory regulation established by the Constitution does not include the unconstitutionality of the corresponding law (its individual provisions), instead only allowing the Government to amend them by its decrees. For a long time in France, there was only preliminary constitutional control over laws, legislative proposals submitted to a referendum, regulations of the chambers of Parliament and international treaties. As a result of the 2008 constitutional reform, a specific, subsequent constitutional review was introduced. It can be initiated in the Constitutional Council by the Court of Cassation or the Council of State upon an appeal, respectively, by a court of general jurisdiction or an administrative court, before which a statement is made that the law being applied to the dispute under consideration violates constitutionally guaranteed human rights. The institution of subsequent constitutional review has proved to be in great demand, and currently, most of the Constitutional Council’s decisions are made within its framework. In modern France, the development of legislation is significantly influenced by EU law. However, neither the Constitutional Council nor the Council of State directly monitor the compliance of laws and regulations with international treaties and EU law.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
法兰西第五共和国对合宪性解释的特殊性
在法国,对法律的合宪性和更广泛的宪法控制制度的理解具有有趣的特点,特别是与其他使用传统的欧洲法律(Kelsen)模式的国家相比。这些包括标准的原创性,立法行为是根据标准来检查的。它是所谓的宪法集团,除了1958年宪法本身,还包括1789年的《人权和公民权宣言》、1946年宪法的序言、2004年的《环境宪章》,以及宪法委员会认为具有宪法意义的原则。根据1958年《宪法》,法国公法的一个特点是议会的立法权限不是普遍的,法律和规章(政府行为)的管理领域是有界限的。在这方面,法国对法律合宪性的要求之一是它不应干涉监管权力的范围,即不应触及不属于《宪法》立法监管主体的问题。但是,议会违反《宪法》所规定的立法和监管规定的界限,并不包括相应的法律(其个别条款)违宪,而只是允许政府通过其法令对其进行修改。在很长一段时间里,法国对法律、提交全民公决的立法提案、议会的规定和国际条约只有初步的宪法控制。作为2008年宪法改革的结果,随后引入了一项具体的宪法审查。上诉可由最高上诉法院或国务委员会分别根据一般管辖权法院或行政法院的上诉在宪法委员会提起诉讼,并在此之前作出声明,说明正在审议的争端所适用的法律违反了宪法保障的人权。后来的宪法审查制度已证明是非常需要的,目前,宪法委员会的大多数决定都是在其框架内作出的。在现代法国,立法的发展受到欧盟法律的显著影响。但是,宪法委员会和国务委员会都不直接监督法律法规是否符合国际条约和欧盟法律。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Review of legal reasoning in the Russian Constitutional Court judgments: Nos. 49‑P – 50‑P (2020), Nos. 1-P – 3-P (2021) Public hearings as an institution of deliberative democracy in major Russian and American cities Is it time to understand Russia rationally? Test of suitability in constitutional adjudication Specificity of the interpretation of constitutionality in the Fifth Republic in France Review of legal reasoning in the Russian Constitutional Court rulings Nos.1638-O, 1640-O-Р, 1642-O, 1643-O, 1644-O, 1641-O (2020)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1