PREFERENDUM. Emmanuel Macron would be “open” to the idea of ??using the preferendum according to government spokesperson Olivier Véran. What is this democratic tool? Is it more advantageous than the referendum?
What if the government considered adding a new democratic tool to its arsenal? This is what executive spokesperson Olivier Véran suggested when discussing the preferendum on the BFMTV set, August 28, 2023. The very brief presentation of what could be a new means of consultation in the opinion of the French that Emmanuel Macron would be ready to use came on the eve of the meeting between the head of state and the leaders of the opposition parties. Interview, fruit of the major political initiative of the Head of State, which should lead to legislative texts or failing that to referendums. But referendums or preferences, what difference does it make?
The preferendum “is a concept which would allow us to test several subjects at the same time during the same vote” explained without further details the spokesman of the government, Olivier Véran. Rather than asking a single question to the French, the executive would question citizens on several hypotheses related to the same subject, or even in relation to different themes independent of each other. Contenting himself with mentioning this possible new tool, the minister did not specify the type of question, or even the type of answer that the French could give.
However, he is not the first to speak of the “preferendum”, the civic association Mieux Voter has been defending the use of this tool since 2018. It explained in 2019 in a column published by Le Monde that what differentiates the preferendum from the referendum c is the rejection of binary “yes” or “no” answers. Instead, “it would be a question of evaluating a set of alternative options submitted to the referendum, using the mentions provided for by the majority judgment (“excellent”, “good”, “passable”, “insufficient”, “to reject”)”, detailed the collective. It is this method based on majority judgment that would make it possible to express a preference of the majority of voters in what would become a preferendum.
If the government plans to use the preferendum, on what subjects does it plan to use it? The use of the classic referendum is only permitted for bills “relating to the organization of public powers, to reforms relating to the economic, social or environmental policy of the nation and to the public services which contribute thereto” and those “tending to authorize the ratification of a treaty which, without being contrary to the Constitution, would affect the functioning of the institutions”, according to Article 11 of the Constitution.
The scope of the preferendum could respond to this article 11 or on the contrary be open to other subjects. Minister Olivier Véran did not say more about the extent of the subjects which could be subject to a hypothetical preferendum.
The usefulness of a preferendum would be based in part on the number of questions posed to citizens, which would allow voters to be questioned on several explicit possibilities rather than on a single large general question. There would therefore be no limit to the number of questions submitted to the preferendum. No more than there is on the number of bills that can be submitted to a referendum during a single consultation.
The only condition to which the referendum must respond is the “double requirement of fairness and clarity of the consultation” imposed by the Council of State so that the questions do not contain any ambiguity. This same requirement could apply to questions asked by preference.
Besides the practical differences between the traditional referendum and the hypothetical recourse to a preferendum, the executive could have advantages in preferring the second option. First, in general, the preferendum would make it possible to circumvent a “reproach often made in the referendum” which is to limit the consultation to a vote of approval for or against the President of the Republic, analyzed Olivier Véran.
Above all, since the preferendum does not have a legal framework, its result cannot have any binding power for the executive. A majority in favor of a question asked in a preferendum would not oblige the government to put in place the bill or the measure voted for, unlike a referendum. “When the referendum has concluded with the adoption of the bill or the proposal of law, the President of the Republic promulgates the law within fifteen days following the proclamation of the results of the consultation”, recalls article 11 of the Constitution. . Nor would the government be obliged to abandon a measure rejected by the majority of voters in the preferendum. In this sense, the preferendum is limited to a citizen consultation, “ex nihilo procedure, a kind of life-size survey organized by the State”, according to the constitutionalist Bertrand Mathieu, interviewed by Le Monde.
