Le Monde | • Updated | By
This time, there is no doubt: the principle of deprivation of nationality will not in the Constitution. By adopting, Thursday, March 17, a version of this radically different measure that passed the Assembly, the Senate ended a suspense that was no longer really.
Read also: Constitutional reform: Senate wants to change the text
Unable to be an agreement between the two chambers, Article 2 of the constitutional amendment concerning the deprivation of nationality for terrorists will never succeed and be endorsed by parliamentarians in Congress.
as expected, senators returned to almost exactly to the earlier version of the text, as it was presented by the Cabinet in late December, before being amended by the Assembly. With 186 votes against 150, with 8 abstentions, they adopted an article which provides for deprivation of nationality reserved only binational, in case of terrorist crimes and would be pronounced by decree. MEPs had voted themselves a deprivation of nationality may affect all French, in case of crimes and imposed by a judge
Read also. “But … what’s serves? “Understand the whole debate on deprivation of nationality
No” lessons to learn “
Even before the debate, the Prime Minister set guard senators: “your proposal will never be adopted by a majority of MPs.” Gold constitutional revision can only succeed if both rooms first come to agree on the same text, so you can then do vote by a three-fifths majority of MPs gathered in Congress.
at the outset, Manuel Valls has made clear to senators that if deprivation of nationality failed, he would wear them accountable. “ In the Assembly, we found an agreement. This consensus was difficult, sometimes painful, in my political family but also in the other groups. In the Senate, you have not sought “, he criticized the right-wing majority, under the objections of several of its members.
Cut to the quick, President the Republicans of the law Committee and rapporteur of the text, Philippe Bas, retorted do not have “lessons to learn” . “It is not by renouncing our convictions that we will achieve this constitutional revision” , continued the Senator of the Channel, to the applause of his camp. The warnings are Manuel Valls did nothing; the rapporteur presented his amendment as intended to rewrite Article 2, with the support of the majority of elected right and center, and the opposition of the entire left.
” maneuvering to prevent a vote “
and, this time with the blessing of the Prime Minister, Philippe Bas has managed to significantly reduce the space of expression opponents through a procedural ruse. While nearly 70 senators, from all sides, had signed amendments to delete Article 2 of the forfeiture, they were ultimately not able to vote.
To the surprise – and with the necessary government approval – the rapporteur argued a provision of Regulation allowing him to spend his first amendment to rewrite the article. Once it is adopted, all amendments deleting related article before modificiation automatically became obsolete and are “fallen” . A “maneuver to prevent the vote” immediately denounced by Eliane Assassi (Seine-Saint-Denis) and other of his fellow communists but also by some Socialists.
D ‘ However, in the end, it will bring nothing more. Addressing Manuel Valls, Senator and national secretary of the Communist Party, Pierre Laurent (Paris), has summarized the absurdity of the situation: “You offer the opportunity to the Chairman of the Committee to present its request the debate to finally sink into a dead end that will lead to nothing. “ If no representative of the government still officially said, the rest of the story appears more and more clearly.
Tearing in all camps
once the bill formally adopted in the Senate chamber on March 22 Article 2 of the deprivation of nationality will eventually be abandoned – that is to say probably removed during the next pass in the Assembly – and the constitutional revision can be presented in Congress with its only section 1, less controversial, to enshrine the state of emergency
in this session of Congress, another. text could be approved, the reform of the Supreme Judicial Council, in parliamentary pipes since 2013, and on which Assembly and Senate are expected to agree. François Hollande therefore eventually have its Congress, but truncated and achieved at the cost of tearing in all political camps
Read also:. After the changes the Senate, the constitutional reform is compromised
Adoption of Article constitutionalising state of emergency
the senators adopted by a large majority Article 1 Bill which entrenches the state of emergency, to 301 votes against 38, with 7 abstentions after slightly amended version of the Assembly. They have reduced from four to three months the maximum period of extension of the state of emergency and deleted the reference to “public calamity” as a condition for the decree. The Senate has also reinforced the principle of parliamentary oversight of the state of emergency and held to include in the Constitution that the measures taken under this exceptional regime must be “narrowly tailored, necessary and proportionate” .