The Green deputy for Isère, Jérémie Iordanoff, was appointed, on Wednesday, September 25, rapporteur on the co-signed resolution proposal by 81 deputies “ insoumis”, environmentalists and communists who intend to bring together Parliament in the High Court, with a view to starting an impeachment process against the President of the Republic, Emmanuel Macron. In the initiative, La France insoumise denounces in particular Emmanuel Macron’s refusal to nominate Lucie Castets, candidate of the New Popular Front, the coalition that came first at the end of the second round of the early legislative elections, on July 7.
This is the first time under the Vmy Republic that an impeachment procedure based on article 68 of the Constitution is subject to the examination of the deputies…
It’s true, there are no precedents. The procedure that we will examine on Wednesday in the Law Commission concerns the possibility of Parliament becoming a High Court. We will examine the underlying arguments to find out whether the President of the Republic committed one or more breaches of his duties that were manifestly incompatible with the exercise of his mandate.
Some decisions can at least be considered political mistakes. The dissolution is absurd. The record deadline of fifty-one days to appoint a prime minister has no valid justification. The appointment in Matignon of Michel Barnier [issu du parti Les Républicains] It does not correspond to the results of the polls. The direct participation of the Head of State in the election of certain members of the Government, after his disapproval in the European elections [le 9 juin] and the legislative [des 30 juin et 7 juillet]…All of this contributes to institutional disorder and a political crisis, the full effects of which we have not yet measured. Is this enough to start an impeachment process? It is the deputies who will have to say it, in committee and then in session, before a possible transmission to the senators.
But you did not sign the “rebel” resolution proposal, unlike your other colleagues from the New Popular Front. The socialists voted in favor of his admissibility in the Assembly, but will ultimately vote against his dismissal. For what reasons?
Although I did not sign this resolution, I did defend the fact that the Ecologist and Social Group voted in favor of its admissibility. It should be understood that the Assembly office decides mainly on the form, with the substance corresponding to the commission and the session. For socialists, but also for many environmentalists or communists, there are doubts about the relevance of the approach and the fear of seeing Emmanuel Macron reinforced in the event of the procedure failing. For my part, I believe that discussion is allowed on the merits and that the debate in the National Assembly is useful for each person to face their responsibilities. If there is anyone responsible for the dissolution and the political crisis that followed, it is the President of the Republic. Everyone understood this well.
You have 45.51% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
