Law On The Status Of The Corsica Region
LexInter | December 23, 2007 | 0 Comments

Law On The Status Of The Corsica Region

The constitutionnal Council,

Marc Jacquet, Marc Bécam, Hubert d’Andigné, Jean Chérioux, Jacques Chaumont, François Collet, Roger Moreau, Henri Portier, Edmond Valcin, Jacques Braconnier. Marcel Fortier, Henri Collette, Maurice Schumann, Georges Repiquet, Paul Kauss, Michel Maurice-Bokanowski, Michel Caldaguès, Louis Souvet, Raymond Brun, Roger Romani, Jean Natali, Charles de Cuttoli, Etienne Dailly, Jacques Pelletier, Jacques Habert, Jean Desmarets , Hector Dubois, Yves Durand, Alphonse Arzel, Jean-Pierre Blanc, Raymond Bouvier, Jean Cauchon, Pierre Ceccaldi-Pavard, François Dubanchet, Charles Durand, Marcel Daunay, Jean Francou, Jacques Genton, Marcel Lemaire, Georges Lombard, Jean Madelain, Claude Mont, Jacques Mossion, Dominique Pado, Raymond Poirier, Roger Poudonson, Maurice Prévoteau, André Rabineau, Paul Séramy, René Tinant, Pierre Vallon,

Having regard to the Constitution;

Considering the ordinance of November 7, 1958 on the organic law on the Constitutional Council, in particular the articles appearing in chapter II of title II of the said ordinance;

Heard the rapporteur in his report;

On the plea alleging violation of the provisions of Articles 72, 73 and 74 of the Constitution:

1. Considering that article 72, paragraph 1, of the Constitution provides that “the territorial collectivities of the Republic are the municipalities, the departments, the overseas territories. Any other territorial collectivity is created by the law”;

2. Considering that, in order to contest the conformity with this provision of the law on the special status of the Corsica region, the authors of the referrals argue that the second sentence of the aforementioned text should be understood as allowing the creation of new categories of local authorities and not the creation of a particular territorial collectivity which derogates from common law; that they add, in support of this assertion, that Articles 73 and 74 of the Constitution, the first of which provides for measures to adapt the legislation to the particular situation of the overseas departments and the second retains the principle of an organization specific to the overseas territories, would demonstrate that there is no such thing in metropolitan territory “

3. Considering, in the first place, that article 72 of the Constitution relates to all the authorities of the Republic while articles 73 and 74 relate exclusively to overseas collectivities; that the provisions of Article 72, which, in a paragraph concerning both the local authorities and those overseas, give competence to the law to create other territorial collectivities, cannot see their application reduced to the sole overseas communities;

4. Considering, in the second place, that the provision of the Constitution under the terms of which “any other territorial collectivity is created by law” in no way excludes the creation of categories of territorial collectivities which would comprise only one unit; that such was the interpretation retained by the legislator when, in metropolitan France, he gave a special statute to the city of Paris and, overseas, he created the territorial collectivity of Mayotte;

5. Considering, moreover, that according to article 1 of the law referred to the examination of the Constitutional Council, the creation of the region of Corsica takes place within the framework of the legislation relating to the rights and freedoms of the communes, of the departments and regions;

6. Considering finally that, contrary to what is argued in the referral, the fact that a local authority has to collaborate with a public establishment not created by it does not affect the free administration of local authorities;

On the plea alleging violation of Article 2 of the Constitution:

7. Considering that under article 2 of the Constitution: “France is an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It ensures equality before the law of all citizens without distinction of origin or race. or religion “;

With regard to the principle of the indivisibility of the Republic:

8. Considering that, according to the authors of the referral, the law submitted for consideration by the Council would be contrary to the indivisibility of the Republic in that “the concept of special status contains, beyond the intentions, obvious risks dislocation of national unity “, which would be demonstrated by the explanatory memorandum and by the parliamentary proceedings;

9. Considering that, in the current state of the definition of the respective attributions of decentralized authorities and state bodies, the text of the law submitted to the consideration of the Constitutional Council does not include any provision which could, as a that such, be regarded as undermining the indivisibility of the Republic and the integrity of the national territory;

With regard to the principle of equality before the law:

10. Considering, in the first place, that the authors of the referral consider that the law referred to the Constitutional Council would be contrary to the principle of equality proclaimed by article 2 of the Constitution, insofar as “there would be disproportion between ‘enactment of a special electoral statute and the fact that Corsica is an island “;

11. Considering that in the current state of the legislation and until the intervention of the text intended to fix the general system of elections to the regional councils nothing allows to maintain that the system applicable to the region of Corsica will be derogatory to the common law applicable to all regions;

12. Considering, in the second place, that, according to the authors of the referral, the law submitted to the examination of the Constitutional Council would still be contrary to equality in that the amnesty measures decreed by article 50 do not apply. ‘apply only to offenses relating to the determination of the special status of Corsica, which do not differ from offenses committed in other parts of the national territory;

13. Considering that by virtue of the provisions of article 34 of the Constitution “the law establishes the rules concerning amnesty”; that by virtue of this competence the legislator can erase certain penal consequences of acts which the law suppresses; that it is up to him, then, to assess what are the offenses and, if applicable, the persons to whom the benefit of these provisions should apply; that the principle of equality does not prevent it thus delimiting the scope of application of the amnesty since the categories it retains are defined objectively; that this is the case in the law submitted to the consideration of the Constitutional Council;

On the plea alleging violation of Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Constitution:

14. Considering that, according to the deputies who made the referral, the law relating to the special status of the region of Corsica disregards the provisions of the Constitution provided that the entry into force of this law is not subject to intervention an organic law and an ordinary law modifying the electoral rules applicable to the Senate and making it possible to ensure the representation of this territorial community;

15. Considering that, although article 24 of the Constitution requires the modification of these legislative provisions, it does not require that it take place before the entry into force of the law relating to the special status of the region of Corsica;

On article 44 of the law:

16. Considering that article 44 of the law provides: “the representative of the State in the Corsica region exercises over all categories of administrative and budgetary acts of the local authority the controls provided for by Title III of the law No. relating to the rights and freedoms of municipalities, departments and regions for all administrative and budgetary acts of the regions “;

17. Considering that, if the reference thus made by the law on the special status of the region of Corsica to Title III of the law on the rights and freedoms of municipalities, departments and regions cannot have effect before the promulgation of new provisions of the said Title III following the decision of the Constitutional Council n ° 82-137 DC of February 25, 1982, this circumstance is not such as to affect the conformity with the Constitution of Article 44 of the law submitted to examination of the Constitutional Council;

18. Considering that in the present case, there is no need for the Constitutional Council to raise ex officio any question of conformity with the Constitution with regard to the other provisions of the law submitted for this examination,

Decide:

ARTICLE 1 – The law relating to the particular status of the Corsica region: administrative organization, is declared not contrary to the Constitution.

ARTICLE 2 – This decision will be published in the Official Journal of the French Republic.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.


CAPTCHA Image
Reload Image