The Constitutional Council (, ) is the highest constitutional authority in France. It was established by the Constitution of the Fifth Republic on 4 October 1958 to ensure that constitutional principles and rules are upheld. It is housed in the Palais-Royal in Paris. Its main activity is to rule on whether proposed statutes conform with the Constitution, after they have been voted by Parliament and before they are signed into law by the president of the republic (a priori review), or passed by the government as a decree, which has law status in many domains, a right granted to the government under delegation of Parliament.
Since 1 March 2010, individual citizens who are party to a trial or a lawsuit have been able to ask for the council to review whether the law applied in the case is constitutional ( review). In 1971, the council ruled that conformity with the Constitution also entails conformity with two other texts referred to in the preamble of the Constitution, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen and the preamble of the constitution of the Fourth Republic, both of which list constitutional rights.Preamble of the Constitution of the Fourth Republic – via Wikisource.Constitution of the Fourth French Republic – via Wikisource.
Members are referred to as ("the wise") in the media and the general public, as well as in the council's own documents. Legal theorist Arthur Dyevre notes that this "tends to make those who dare criticise them look unwise". Since 2025, Richard Ferrand has served as President of the Constitutional Council () following his appointment by President Emmanuel Macron and subsequent confirmation.
Powers and tasks Overview The Council has two main areas of power: The first is the supervision of elections, both presidential and parliamentary, and ensuring the legitimacy of referendums (Articles 58, 59 and 60). They issue the official results, ensure proper conduct and fairness, and see that campaign spending limits are adhered to. The Council is the supreme authority in these matters. The Council can declare an election to be invalid if improperly conducted, the winning candidate used illegal methods, or the winning candidate spent more than the legal limits for the campaign. The second area of council power is the interpretation of the fundamental meanings of the constitution, procedure, legislation, and treaties. The council can declare dispositions of laws to be contrary to the Constitution of France or to the principles of constitutional value that it has deduced from the Constitution or from the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. It also may declare laws to be in contravention of treaties that France has signed, such as the European Convention on Human Rights. Their declaring that a law is contrary to constitutional or treaty principles renders it invalid. The council also may impose reservations as to the interpretation of certain provisions in statutes. The decisions of the council are binding on all authorities.
Examination of laws by the council is compulsory for some acts, such as for organic bills, those which fundamentally affect government, and treaties, which need to be assessed by the council before they are considered ratified (Article 61-1 and 54). Amendments concerning the rules governing parliamentary procedures need to be considered by the council as well. Guidance may be sought from the council in regard to whether reform should come under statute law (voted by Parliament) or whether issues are considered as (regulation) to be adopted with decree of the prime minister. The re-definition of legislative dispositions as regulatory matters initially constituted a significant share of the (then light) caseload of the council.
In the case of other statutes, seeking the oversight of the council is not compulsory. However, the president of the republic, the president of the Senate, the president of the National Assembly, the prime minister, 60 members of the National Assembly, or 60 SenatorsNote that this is not 60 members of Parliament: all members on the referral petition must be from the same house of Parliament, though of course members from both houses can submit petitions at the same time and with the same arguments. can submit a statute for examination by the council before its signing into law by the president. In general, it is the parliamentary opposition that brings laws that it deems to infringe civil rights before the council.Tony Prosser, Constitutions and Political Economy: The Privatisation of Public Enterprises in France and Great Britain, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 53, No. 3 (May 1990), pp. 304–320; see p. 307 "The number of references has steadily grown; it is no exaggeration to claim that any important controversial legislation is now likely to be referred."
Another task, of lesser importance in terms of number of referrals, is the reclassification of statute law into the domain of regulations on the prime minister's request. This happens when the prime minister and his government wish to alter law that has been enacted as statute law, but should instead belong to regulations according to the Constitution. The prime minister has to obtain reclassification from the council prior to taking any decree changing the regulations. This, however, is nowadays only a small fraction of the council's activity: in 2008, out 140 of decisions, only 5 concerned reclassifications.Constitutional Council, Index of 2008 decisions
Enactment of legislation
The Government of France consists of an executive branch (President of the Republic, prime minister, ministers and their services and affiliated organisations); a legislative branch (both houses of Parliament); and a judicial branch.
The judicial branch does not constitute a single hierarchy: Administrative courts fall under the Council of State, Civil and criminal courts under the Court of Cassation, Some entities also have advisory functions.
For historical reasons, there has long been political hostility in the nation to the concept of a "Supreme Court"—that is, a powerful court able to quash legislation, because of the experience of citizens in the pre-Revolutionary era.James Beardsley, "Constitutional Review in France", The Supreme Court Review, Vol. 1975, (1975), pp. 189–259Michael H. Davis, The Law/Politics Distinction, the French Conseil Constitutionnel, and the U. S. Supreme Court, The American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Winter, 1986), pp. 45–92Denis Tallon, John N. Hazard, George A. Bermann, The Constitution and the Courts in France, The American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 27, No. 4 (Autumn, 1979), pp. 567–587
Whether the Constitutional Council is a court is a subject of academic discussion,François Luchaire, "Le Conseil constitutionnel est-il une juridiction ?", Revue du droit public et de la science politique en France et à l'étranger (RDP), janvier-juin 1979 (volume 1), pp. 27–52 but some scholars consider it effectively the supreme court of France.Marcel Waline, The Constitutional Council of the French Republic, The American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 12, No. 4 (Autumn, 1963), pp. 483–493 lists reasons for the Council to be considered as a court: "If it be admitted that a judicial authority is characterized by the effect of res judicata attaching to its decisions, it must necessarily be concluded that the Constitutional Council is a court, and even the supreme court of the State."
The Constitution of the French Fifth Republic distinguishes two kinds of legislation: statute law, which is normally voted upon by Parliament (except for ordonnances), and government regulations, which are enacted by the prime minister and his government as decrees and other regulations (arrêtés). Article 34 of the Constitution exhaustively lists the areas reserved for statute law: these include, for instance, criminal law.
Any regulation issued by the executive in the areas constitutionally reserved for statute law is unconstitutional unless it has been authorized by a statute as secondary legislation. Any citizen with an interest in the case can obtain the cancellation of these regulations by the Council of State, on grounds that the executive has exceeded its authority. Furthermore, the Council of State can quash regulations on grounds that they violate existing statute law, constitutional rights, or the "general principles of law".Lionel Neville Brown, John Bell, Jean-Michel Galabert, French administrative law, 5 ed., 1998, Clarendon Press, ; see p. 220 for the general principles of Law.
In addition, new acts can be referred to the Constitutional Council by a petition just prior to being signed into law by the president of the republic. The most common circumstance for this is that 60 opposition members of the National Assembly, or 60 opposition members of the Senate request such a review.
If the prime minister thinks that some clauses of existing statute law instead belong to the domain of regulations, he can ask the council to reclassify these clauses as regulations.Article 37 of the Constitution: "Provisions of statutory origin enacted in such matters may be amended by decree issued after consultation with the Council of State. Any such provisions passed after the coming into force of the Constitution shall be amended by decree only if the Constitutional Council has found that they are matters for regulation as defined in the foregoing paragraph."An example of such reclassification is decision 2008-210 L of 7 May 2008, with scholarly commentary in Commentaire de la décision n° 2008-210 L du 7 mai 2008 – Nature juridique de dispositions du code de la route ("Comments on decision 2008-210 L of 7 May 2008 – Juridical nature of provisions in the Road code") in Les Cahiers du Conseil constitutionnel, Cahier n° 25 ("The Constitutional Council's notebooks"): the name of the administration with which certain administrative procedures should be filed is not the domain of statute law, but of regulation.
Traditionally, France refused to accept the idea that courts could quash legislation enacted by Parliament (though administrative courts could quash regulations produced by the executive). This reluctance was based in the French revolutionary era: pre-revolutionary courts had often used their power to refuse to register laws and thus prevent their application for political purposes, and had blocked reforms. French courts were prohibited from making rulings of a general nature. Also, politicians believed that, if courts could quash legislation after it had been enacted and taken into account by citizens, there would be too much legal uncertainty: how could a citizen plan his or her actions according to what is legal or not if laws could a posteriori be found not to hold? Yet, in the late 20th century, courts, especially administrative courts, began applying international treaties, including law of the European Union, as superior to national law.
A 2009 reform, effective on 1 March 2010, enables parties to a lawsuit or trial to question the constitutionality of the law that is being applied to them. The procedure, known as , is broadly as follows: the question is raised before the trial judge and, if it has merit, is forwarded to the appropriate supreme court (Council of State if the referral comes from an administrative court, Court of Cassation for other courts). The supreme court collects such referrals and submits them to the Constitutional Council. If the Constitutional Council rules a law to be unconstitutional, this law is struck down from the law books. The decision applies to everyone and not only to the cases at hand.
History and evolution