This paper tell, one more time than the actual French constitution is monarchic in spirit, with an "elected king". But historically, this constitution is far mo

This paper tell, one more time than the actual French constitution is monarchic in spirit, with an "elected king". But historically, this constitution is far more inspired by the two empires regimes than the french monarchies. - There was a "Sacred King selected by God" for the kingdoms aspect totally missing in the empires, while the emperors where, supposedly, "selected by the people" - the two chambers system, was first used by the consulate, a pre-imperial temporary regime (it was a fake triumvirate where Bonaparte was the only real ruler). This two chamber system was inspired by the UK system to appease monarchists and keep by the various regimes since then (except Vichy France). - the first empire have used a lot (of rigged) referendum where all adult male, where allowed to vote. - The first "suffrage universel" to elect a president was established by the second republic, and then abused by the new president, and future second emperor (all men, no women, no clergy and no algerians where allowed to vote) - The constitutions of the second empire include a referendum, called "plebiscite",as a way to either to approve the emperor or to change the law over the parliament. This was inspired by the first empire, and this is also the fact in the actual constitution. (Recently there was a change in the actual constitution to allow a referendum launched by member of the parliament. It was written in a way to render it unusable.) The way the institution are organised, the constitutions of the second empire (1862) and the actual constitution are father and daughter... The real big difference is than the actual constitution include at the start the "Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen" from 1789. Also, De Gaule had lost a referendum in 1969! This was a big change, the idea was to allow the president to force a change of the constitution by referendum, but this time this a become a tool against him because he had say before "if i lost i quit", so the question was more "did we keep De Gaule as president or not ?" The same in 2005, there was another lost one, and a very big one, because France had say no to an European treaty (and also Netherlands) Since then the government/presidents do not use this tool any more they prefer to change the constitution using the parliament because it's less risky... (and using this way the two "No" where changed to "Yes" later) The history of Napoleon III becoming an emperor after being an elected president by the people was one of the main reason of the opposition of the parliament against De Gaulle for the change of the constitution. De Gaule had reply at the time than he was too old to become a dictator but Napoleon III had said before something like "In a democratic government, only the leader must have the power to govern".