The Constitutional Council's 1962 decision on the referendum law regarding the election of the President by direct universal suffrage, and its implications on the Council's competence.
Extract
[...] By this decision dated November the Constitutional Council avoids pronouncing on the matter of substance by declaring itself incompetent to determine the conformity to the Constitution of a law adopted by referendum. Announce the plan. The restrictive interpretation of the Council's competences A competence of attribution See the first consideration which is essential: it defines the CC as a jurisdiction of attribution. In other words, it is only competent in matters and according to procedures that have been explicitly defined by the texts that have been dedicated to it: Constitution (title + organic law of 7 November 1958. [...]
[...] Confirmation of a constant jurisprudence. The Council defines itself as a 'regulatory body of the activity of public powers'. La fidélité to the spirit of the Constitution This is the result of an interpretation of the texts, and not the application of clear provisions. In a pedagogical way, he explains that this interpretation results from 'the express provisions of the Constitution, and notably Article 60 which determines the role of the CC in matters of referendum and Article 11' and Article 17 of the Organic Law of November on the CC which only mentions 'laws adopted by Parliament' + Article 23 of the same Organic Law. [...]
[...] Above all, and on this point it will be explicitly denied by the Council, it estimated that the exercise of national sovereignty, whether by the representatives of the people or by the voters consulted by way of referendum, is 'legitimate only in respect of the rules and procedures instituted by the Constitution.' A drift towards a strong presidential regime Or even a risk of drift towards plebiscite. The first years under the presidency of the GDG explain the trend towards presidencialism. The establishment of universal direct suffrage and then constant practices have come to reinforce this trend. The President today exceeds the role of arbitrator that the Constitution conferred on him by Article 5. He is thus qualified as 'republican monarch' or 'Jupiter-like president'. [...]
