A democratic slap on Article 1 and a big magnifying effect on Article 2. The Assembly adopted Monday night in section 1 of the constitutional amendment on the state of emergency in the absence of three quarters of MPs: the measure was passed on the spot 22:15 by 103 votes (including 96 Socialists) and 26 votes against. Only ten deputies Republicans were meeting during the vote. The elected National Front had totally deserted the chamber. In total, after seven weeks of controversy through the media, questions about the values of France and, to a lesser extent, the security of the country, 441 MPs chose not to choose. PS Eight members opposed to Article 1, from the ranks of the slingers, including former Minister Benoit Hamon. The environmentalist group voted overwhelmingly against, with the exception of Denis Baupin, Barbara Pompili and François de Rugy.
MEPs adopted several details, such as limiting the state of emergency to four months renewable against three currently proposed President of IDU group, Jean-Christophe Lagarde. But the idea of establishing an opinion of the Constitutional Council before any extension of the state of emergency that wanted a bunch of Socialists was rejected. Same for several attempts, including environmentalist Cécile Duflot, asking “metes and bounds” to the state of emergency. The proposal to delete Article 16 of the Constitution, establishing the state of siege, also fizzled: 95 votes against
PS amendment prohibiting dissolution of the Assembly for the state. emergency has yet been passed to the surprise of the government. Which bristles right and thereby further weakens more constitutional revision. “The prospect of the 3 / 5ths away” , Guillaume Sarkozy threatens Larrivé, unprepared that eventually abstain on clause 1, as Eric Ciotti and Georges Fenech. Sensing danger from the wrath of the right, Manuel Valls finally believes it will “probably” reconsider this amendment “opens many other problematics” . This increases the feeling of a permanent deal between the opposition and the executive to save and the text and its implementation. “It affects the balance of our institutions in the name of an alleged defense of freedom, it is serious,” , says Pierre Lellouche (LR).
The guts cons forfeiture
Article 1 passed calmly, the Assembly returns to form and voice by addressing the debate on the deprivation of nationality. For nearly three hours, MPs of all stripes enquillent the indictments against the measure polarized the national political debate since late December. Certainly supporters of forfeiture were spared the nocturnal discussion and should be back en masse in the Chamber on Tuesday afternoon to trench warfare on the amendments. But speakers of the estate out their guts against forfeiture confirms that the party is very far from over for Francois Hollande.
As in the debate on marriage for all, very personal story MPs resurfaces in the Chamber. To explain his rejection of the forfeiture, Sébastien Pietrasanta recalls that her family, Jewish, who fled Egypt, was stateless. In tears, the centrist Charles de Courson convene it, the memory of his grandfather refused full powers to Petain died in deportation and his father resistant to explain it … vote decay.
opponents parading to the microphone to denounce a measure that “legal clothes of a philosophical absurdity” , according to Charles Piron (UDI), a “ineffective scarecrow” dixit Kheira Bouziane-Laroussi (PS). “When we ourselves birth to monsters, how to escape our responsibilities” application with accuracy and emotion Hélène Geoffroy, the Socialist mayor of Vaulx-en-Velin. In short, certify Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet a sepulchral voice past 0:30, “no one supports the measure. More people”. “This revision was to sign a political victory for President of the Republic, it became a nightmare for those who wear” adds LR MP, back in the Chamber in time for Article 2 without going through the box section 1.
on the benches of the Government, Manuel Valls spends almost impassible evening, hands on knees or on a big book. Neither the Prime Minister nor the three other members of the government (Jean-Jacques Urvoas, Bernard Cazeneuve and Jean-Marie Le Guen) present not speak on Article 2, leaving scroll around 70 speakers. In constitutional matters, MEPs debate in public the text of the government and not the one that was amended Law Committee after a series of turnovers at the top. In this case, it requires the government to virtually start again Tuesday to formally vote on the compromise that he has found with its majority – it does not apply to dual nationals – in a semicircle where the right – who will cover only binational – promises not do him any gifts
No comments:
Post a Comment