While the immigration law was adopted just a week ago, the President of the Republic Emmanuel Macron officially referred the matter to the Constitutional Council on Tuesday, December 26.
Emmanuel Macron was committed to this, and it was done, the Sages were asked on December 26 to verify the conformity of the text of the immigration law. As noted by our colleagues from France Info, the Constitutional Council announced on its site that it had been contacted by Emmanuel Macron regarding the immigration law adopted under pressure exactly a week ago, to ensure the regularity of the text.
But the President of the Republic is not the only one. Other referrals were made. The Constitutional Council indicates on its website that it has been contacted in total by three different parties. Yaël Braun-Pivet, President of the National Assembly, Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne and “more than sixty deputies” appealed to the institution to ensure the constitutionality of the text of the immigration law.
In his referral, the President of the Republic indicates that he wants “the provisions of the law to be implemented only after the Constitutional Council has verified that they respect the rights and freedoms that the Constitution guarantees”, the text of the law having evolved “compared to its initial version” he explains.
When will the constitutional council make its decision? For the moment, no deliberation date has been announced. The Constitutional Council must, however, render its decision one month after the referral at the latest as provided for in the Constitution: “the Constitutional Council must rule within one month. However, at the request of the Government, if there is an emergency , this period is reduced to eight days.” The Sages will therefore give their response no later than January 26 as there has been no emergency request from the government.
Friday December 22, the Constitutional Council had already been contacted by four left-wing groups (LFI, PS, ecologists and communists) to contest the entire immigration law. According to them, many articles are “contrary to constitutional principles.”
