Five Avenues for Constitutional Reform Prior to the 2027 Presidential Election
The French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789 places the principle of all sovereignty "essentially in the Nation", an abstract entity that speaks only through its representatives. The Constitution of 1958 tries to reconcile that tradition with the sovereignty of the people: under its Article 3, "national sovereignty belongs to the people, who exercise it through their representatives and by means of referendum".
Between that principle and the actual workings of the institutions, the gap is considerable. In practice, the people exercise their sovereignty only when they are consulted, and their decision can be undone. In 2005, the French rejected the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe by referendum, with 54.67 per cent of votes cast. In 2008, Parliament, sitting as a Congress of both houses, amended the Constitution to allow ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, which took over most of its substance. No national referendum has been held since.
The Constitution provides two routes to amendment. Article 89 requires both houses of Parliament to pass the text in identical terms, and then its approval by referendum or, for government bills only, by Parliament sitting as Congress with a three-fifths majority of votes cast. Article 11 allows the President of the Republic, on a proposal from the government or from both houses, to put certain bills directly to the people. General de Gaulle used it in 1962 to introduce the electionof the President by direct universal suffrage. The Constitutional Council, which reviews whether laws comply with the Constitution, then declared that it had no jurisdiction over a law constituting "the direct expression of national sovereignty".
Its current President, Richard Ferrand, maintains that only Article 89 allows the Constitution to be amended, a position the Council endorsed in a letter of 26 October 2026. Yet in November 2025 the Senate had refused to write that exclusivity into the Constitution.
So that the people's voice can no longer be bypassed, the paper outlines five avenues, each tested against a criterion inspired by Montesquieu: would this rule be dangerous in the hands of the government one trusts least?
1. A referendum lock.
What the people have rejected could, for five years, be restored only by a new referendum, and any transfer of powers to the European Union would be put to them, as in Ireland since 1987.
2. A citizens' initiative referendum.
The current 'shared initiative' procedure requires the support of 185 members of Parliament and then of nearly 4.8 million voters. It has never succeeded. One million signatures would suffice, subject to prior review by the Constitutional Council.
3. A budget that is always voted.
In January 2026, the State budget was adopted without a vote under Article 49, paragraph 3: the Prime Minister may stake the government's responsibility on a text, which is then deemed adopted unless a motion of censure is passed. Article 47 goes further: if Parliament has not decided within seventy days, the budget may be brought into force by ordinance, that is, by an act of the governmentalone. Instead, the previous year's budget would be renewed, on the German model.
4. Debt by consent.
Parliament would hold a separate and solemn vote on the borrowing of all public administrations and a balanced-budget rule would be approved by referendum, as in Switzerland in 2001.
5. An open presidential election.
150,000 citizens' sponsorships would suffice to stand as a candidate, alongside the 500 signatures of elected officials required today.
These avenues settle no question of substance, whether on Europe, immigration or public spending. They say only who decides in the last resort. They open the way to a deeper refoundation of the State, built on the common good and subsidiarity, which it will be for the people alone to decide.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.
This article was originally published on Expert Analytical Association "Sovereignty."
Maître Virginie de Araújo-Recchia, Attorney at the Paris Bar, Public Policy Analyst, Member of Sovereignty
Global Research is a reader-funded media. We do not accept any funding from corporations or governments. Help us stay afloat. Click the image below to make a one-time or recurring donation.
Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page Become a Member of Global Research
Source link
