“This refers very clearly to the ideology of the Vichy regime,” denounces a lawyer

The National Rally wants to “prevent” the access of dual nationals to certain high-ranking positions in the administration or the army, for example. According to Serge Slama, professor of public law at the University of Grenoble-Alpes, member of the Legal Research Center, denounces an unconstitutional proposal.

“We do not intend to call into question dual nationality (…). On the other hand, we actually intend to reserve a certain number of strategic jobs in sectors particularly linked to security and defense exclusively for French citizens.“, insisted Jordan Bardella, Monday June 24, during the presentation of the National Rally’s program for the early legislative elections of June 30 and July 7. A proposal which caused a stir within the political class.

For Serge Slama, professor of public law at the University of Grenoble-Alpes, member of the Legal Research Center, behind this measure “contrary to the Constitution“, “the legitimacy of the Constitutional Council“could be targeted by the RN.

franceinfo: Is this measure applicable, in your opinion?

Serge Slama: This is contrary to the Constitution. But if you heard correctly what Jordan Bardella says, he wants to reserve these jobs exclusively for French citizens. However, when he speaks of French citizen, in fact, he means French citizen of origin. This refers very clearly to the ideology of Jean-Marie Le Pen’s National Front, and more broadly to the ideology of Vichy. The only government in France that had reserved a certain number of jobs for French people of French ancestry and French fathers was Pétain’s Vichy. And we find exactly the same DNA here, which is obviously contrary to the principles of the Republic. And there is absolutely no doubt, if such a text were adopted, it would be contrary to the principle of equality, of equal access for citizens, to public jobs.

Does this mean that the National Rally is already initiating a possible duel with the Constitutional Council in the event of accession to Matignon?

Yes quite. And even with French institutions and the Constitution itself. In reality, in France, when there are security jobs, we can already have opinions from a senior defense official to know if, in the case of dual nationality, this could pose problems of disclosure of secrets or vulnerability. in terms of defense security. But this is normal. When we check a person who is cleared for “defense secrets” or who has access to secrets, there are checks. But here, the idea is to exclude some French people from these jobs. This is all the more strange since Jordan Bardella himself is probably binational. He is in fact of Italian origin and one cannot lose Italian nationality.

So, what is the point of proposing the adoption of a law contrary to the Constitution and which will therefore not actually have the possibility of passing?

The RN has already fallen back a lot. At the beginning, they wanted to call into question the very principle of binationality. Then, there was a proposed constitutional law from January 2024 which states that dual nationals will not have access to public jobs. And now, it is “just” certain jobs that would be prohibited for dual nationals. The RN has therefore fallen back a lot, but today they are facing the wall of reality.

“That is to say, they realize that the speech made by the National Front for 30 or 40 years is contrary to republican principles and contrary to the Constitution: whether it is the national preference, whether it is the suppression of the law of the soil, whether here it is the fact of excluding dual nationals from a certain number of jobs…”

Serge Slama

at franceinfo

We saw it with the immigration law: a few months ago, the far right with the LR and part of the presidential majority had reworked a text which had then, in its version adopted by the National Assembly, been censored by the Constitutional Council. Could this be part of the political game?

Yes quite. As the Constitutional Council said then, national preference is contrary to our Constitution, contrary to the principle of national solidarity. However, the National Rally already sees what can happen. The risk is therefore the balance of power, the risk of distorting our institutions from the moment there is a blockage. Another measure announced by Jordan Bardella is the reform of the Constitution through article 11 of the Constitution. However, this is not possible: if we want to reform the Constitution, it is article 89 and this supposes that the Senate agrees and that the President of the Republic convenes the Congress. We cannot therefore call into question the legitimacy of the Constitutional Council here. We can of course criticize it, it is not perfect. We are many jurists have criticized its composition, sometimes the lack of motivation of the decisions of the “Wise People”. But the body itself is legitimate: installed since 1958, it has developed the control of constitutionality since 1971. In a rule of law, in a democracy, it is normal to have a supreme jurisdiction which censors laws which violate the fundamental law.