PARIS — President Emmanuel Macron’s contentious selection to lead France’s top constitutional authority has received approval, albeit by an exceptionally narrow margin. Richard Ferrand’s nomination was ratified on Wednesday, coming perilously close to rejection by just a single vote.
Announced earlier this month, Ferrand’s appointment faced immediate backlash from both political adversaries and legal experts. Criticism centered on his close ties to Macron and his relatively limited legal qualifications. Unlike many other constitutional courts across the globe, France’s Conseil Constitutionnel includes not only trained judges and lawyers but also former politicians among its members.
Unprecedented tension surrounds Ferrand’s nomination
Traditionally, nominations to the Conseil Constitutionnel proceed with little contention, but the current fractured state of the French legislature and the contentious nature of Ferrand’s selection introduced an unusual level of drama to the process. Historically, no nominee has come as close to being rejected in recent French history.
Interestingly, Ferrand found unexpected support from the far-right National Rally party, which opted to abstain from voting against his confirmation. National Rally spokesperson Bryan Masson revealed that Ferrand had “reassured” far-right lawmakers during his confirmation hearing, a development that played a crucial role in his narrow victory.
Implications for upcoming legal battles
The National Rally has a vested interest in the composition of the upcoming Conseil Constitutionnel, as the court is expected to adjudicate a case that could significantly affect the political future of its leader, Marine Le Pen. Le Pen currently faces trial on charges of participating in an alleged embezzlement scheme, with prosecutors seeking a five-year ban on her eligibility for public office, enforceable even if she appeals.
The ruling by the Conseil Constitutionnel will determine whether imposing an ineligibility ruling before a defendant has fully exhausted their appeals undermines the constitutional right of voters to freely select their representatives. This critical judgment is anticipated to be delivered before the verdict in Le Pen’s case, which is scheduled for late March.
“The court is set to rule whether enforcing an ineligibility ruling before a defendant has exhausted their appeals undermines the constitutionally guaranteed right of voters to freely choose their representatives.”