Extract
[...] Finally, the question posed must be serious. In the affirmative, the judge suspends judgment and transmits the QPC to the High Jurisdiction of which he depends. The examination of the conditions of receivability of the question are then the same as before the judge of the fact except the last: the question must be new or serious. It is therefore obvious that the administrative judge, no more than the judicial judge, does not see himself conferred a direct control of constitutionality of the law. [...]
[...] Precisely, it is the supreme manifestation of national sovereignty. And, in this capacity, it enjoys a prestige and authority that impose themselves on all and particularly on the judge, in accordance with the separation of powers where he is, in principle, only the "the mouth of the law ». However, the evolution of law has produced a complex relationship between the administrative judge and the Law that is no longer that of a simple reverence for it. Consequently, even if the immunity of the law remains a reality it is today largely eroded (II). [...]
[...] On the other hand, there is a case where national law takes precedence over international law: it is the case of international custom (jurisprudence "Aquarone, 1997). In addition, the superiority of international law does not extend to the Constitution as it appears in the judgment « Sarran and Levacher of the Council of State of 30 October 1998 or even of the judgment « Fraisse of the Court of Cassation of 2 June 2000. Regarding the particular situation of European Union law, the primacy of which over the internal law of Member States, including constitutional law, has been established by the Court of Justice, the administrative judge has devised an original solution which has enabled it to reconcile the two claims to primacy of the two legal orders. [...]
[...] In fact, the Constitution, by organizing the political, institutional, and legal life of the State, naturally claims such a rank. It is therefore the fundamental and supreme norm. The international commitments of France, namely the general treaties, the law of "of the European Union and that of the « European Convention on Human Rights intercalates between the Constitution and the Law, « expression of the general will". However, in practice, there is no systematic verification of compliance with this pyramidal model; the judge's mediation is necessary. [...]
[...] It will be the dedicated judge of the administration because it is considered more aware of the general interest. But since then, the office of the administrative judge has been enriched: it is no longer just the judge of the administration but also that of the citizens to protect them from possible abuses by the administration. At the same time, the Constitutional Council, originally created to ensure compliance with the distribution of powers between the domain of law and that of regulations, has gradually shed its sole role to establish itself as a guarantor of rights and freedoms. [...]
