L'Humanité in English
Translation of selective papers from the french daily newspaper l'Humanité
decorHome > Politics > Jean-Pierre Bosino: “The unacceptable challenge to the separation of (...)

EditorialWorldPoliticsEconomySocietyCultureScience & TechnologySport"Tribune libre"Comment and OpinionTranslators’ CornerLinksBlog of Cynthia McKennonBlog of Tom GillBlog of Hervé FuyetBlog of Kris WischenkamperBlog of Gene ZbikowskiBlog of G. AshaBlog of Joseph M. Cachia Blog of Peggy Cantave Fuyet
About France, read also
decorHollande is Satisfied with his International Politics decorHigh-school Students in Saint-Denis Study the Concept of Love decorStop the airstrikes in Syria and Strenghten the UN decor“Universal access to water has given way to economic interest” decorThe 99%: pleading on behalf of the ’us’ in politics decorA Toxic Law, Poisonous to Health decorJean-Luc Mélenchon, Former Presidential Candidate For the Front de gauche, Launches His Candidacy For 2017 decorAt the end of 2015 the figures are astounding: decorEsther Benbassa: “Returning common law to the judiciary is a must” decorDenis Salas “A constitution is not an instrument of penal policy” decor14-year-old girls in its factories: Samsung in the dock decorUnemployment: 84 percent of French people do not believe in the drop

Jean-Pierre Bosino: “The unacceptable challenge to the separation of powers”

Translated Monday 11 January 2016, by Adrian Jordan

Interview by Julia Hamlaoui

"As its name indicates, the state of emergency should not be permanent. And this is the very risk with constitutionalisation."

"That our fellow citizens have the need to feel protected, there is no doubt. However, there have been more than 3,000 police searches with, overall, limited results - you could say almost none. There are increased investigative powers, given to the police and security services, deemed necessary for the fight against terrorism. The constitutionalisation of the state of emergency will have grave repercussions."

"This instrument sets aside judicial power, which poses a real problem regarding the separation of powers. [1]. This is because administrative justice pertains to politics. It is therefore politics that decides who is to be searched, who is to be placed under house arrest, without the interference of a judge. This is unacceptable in a democratic country. Inclusion of such measures within the Constitution makes them permanent, with the risk of all possible regressions."

"Rescission of nationality, even if a u-turn is made on the issue, is a revealing, almost characterising, example: its aim is to respond to pressure, particularly from the National Front, without regard to usefulness. As if threatening to rescind the nationality of people prepared to blow themselves up will dissuade them."

"On the other hand, in the context of a permanent state of emergency, trade unions and political freedoms could be undermined by a simple administrative decision. Because two shirts are ripped off, unionists or demonstrators could be treated like terrorists. Now, the prolonging of the state of emergency for three months, like the scheme to constitutionalise it, shows the will to have recourse to these measures in a permanent manner."

"By taking this path, the government would be burdened with countless difficulties in trying to reverse these uncommon measures - without considering the fact that another political party could come to power and use these measures in an even more repressive manner."

[1This is the notion that, within a democracy, the functions of state should be divided in order to prevent abuse of power, hence the administrative (and executive), legislative and judicial powers are separated in a real democracy. However, even in democratic countries, there is often a blurring of the lines, as was seen under Thatcher in the UK, in what was termed an “elective dictatorship” – with a similar risk being perceived here under Hollande.

Follow site activity RSS 2.0 | Site Map | Translators’ zone | SPIP