Page 133 - DPOL202_COMPARATIVE_POLITICS_AND_GOVERNMENT_ENGLISH

Comparative Politics and Government

Notes constitutional law on the admission to the Russian Federation and the creation within it of
new constituent entities of the Federation or on changes in the constitutional and legal status
of the constituent units of the Federation.
It shows that by nature this Constitution is rigid like the Swiss, French and German constitutions.
French Constitutionalism
The French people have their own notions about constitutionalism hinging on the touchstione of
‘republicanism’—a term about which they have some general and well-understood outlines, though
subtle differences persist among the leading political forces so far as the matter relating to essential
details is concerned. It all begins from the Great Revolution when the people could establish their
‘republican tradition that in a period of less than 10 years moved the country from a monarchy
ruled virtually by the divine rights dogma of the Louis dynasty to a Republican Monarchy, and
then to a Republic, thereon to a government by one party controlled in effect by a small directorate
(under Robbespiere), known as the Committee of Public Safety, to a collegial dictatorship—the
Directorate—and, finally, to a Consulate and an empire with the young Napoleon at its head. And
yet the movement did not stop. Once again monarchy had its termination paving way for the
advent of a full-fledged republican system until France had the bitter lessons of a dictatorial
system during the Second World War at the hands of the Vichy regime. Even this system of
uncontrolled Bonapartism had its termination. A new model of republicanism witnessed its
establishment that failed to live beyond a period of 12 years when in 1958 the people hailed the
return of Gen. de Gaulle and than a new constitution came into force.
The French concept of constitutionalism may, however, be said to have been swinging between
the traits of parliamentary sovereignty on the one hand and a strong one-man rule on the other.
The result is that questions like Who rules France? Who speaks for France? How France should be
ruled? and the like have been bedevilling the minds of the people. One may find that sometimes
the absolute monarch, sometimes the legislature, sometimes one man with the gun have been
trying to solve the crucial issues.
The history of French constitutional experiments begins with the inauguration of the First Republic
in 1792. We have already seen that the National Assembly adopted the ‘Declaration of the Rights
of Man and Citizen’ in 1791 and then drafted a constitution on its basis. The form of government
set up under the constitution was comparable with the traditional American system or with the
British government before the establishment of the present cabinet system. In other words, it was
based on the twin principles of separation of powers and sovereignty of the people. The powers of
the monarch were drastically cut so as to make him a constitutional monarch, while the law-
making body took the form of an unicameral Legislative Assembly of 745 members chosen for two
years and distributed amongst the 83 Departments according to territory, population and direct
taxes.
A basic change took place in 1793 when the Convention succeeded the Legislative Assembly that
abolished the monarchy. A new constitution (called the Girondin Constitution) was presented that
could not be voted in the Convention. Rather another constitution (called the Montagnard
Constitution) was adopted in 1793 after its ratification by the people. It vested power in an Assembly,
that was to be elected annually by direct universal manhood suffrage. It was empowered to issue
decrees and pass laws, the latter being subject to the kind of optional referendum. The executive
was to consist of a Council of 24 to be chosen one-half annually by a complicated process. The
voters were to choose electors who in turn were to nominate candidates from amongst whom the
legislative body was to select the actual members of the executive council.
This constitution was replaced in 1799 by the Constitution of the Consulate based on a plan
framed by Abbe Sieyes considerably modified in a monarchical direction by Napoleon Bonaparte.
Thus, Napoleon Bonaparte assumed all authority in his hands as the First Consul so much so that
in 1804 he made a drastic change in the constitution so as to establish the First Empire. The
constitutional charter of 1814, in a certain theoretical sense, marked the restoration of the ancient
regime in view of the fact that the personal sovereignty of the king was definitely recognised. The
king became the personal chief of the executive power and he alone possessed the initiative in

128 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY