3 ms·

The 1958 coup was successful. You might be confusing it with the failed 1961 coup. In 1958, the military in Algeria (then still part of France) rebelled agains

The 1958 coup was successful. You might be confusing it with the failed 1961 coup. In 1958, the military in Algeria (then still part of France) rebelled against the government, and successfully invaded Corsica. They threatened to invade metropolitan France unless the government stepped down, which it did. They then installed Charles de Gaulle in power and rewrote the constitution. As French Wikipedia notes, "il s'agit du dernier coup d'État réussi en France" ("it's the last successful coup d'état in France").[0] > Therefore it allows the president's government to force through laws only if there aren't enough members of parliament to vote for them, but not against them. It forces parliament to choose between deposing the government or allowing the law to go through. There's no option to simply reject the law, as would be the case in most normal democracies. 0. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d%27%C3%89tat_du_13_mai_1958 https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d%27%C3%89tat_du_13_mai_1...

sofixa 3y ago
> The 1958 coup was successful. You might be confusing it with the failed 1961 coup. Indeed you're right, I'm confusing my coups. > It forces parliament to choose between deposing the government or allowing the law to go through. There's no option to simply reject the law, as would be the case in most normal democracies. Yes, that's the whole point of the 49.3 provision, for the government to be able to force legislation that parliament wouldn't agree to. That's why there are guardrails around it, like parliament having the option to bring down the government if it disagrees.
- DiogenesKynikos 3y ago
  Consider me old-fashioned, but I prefer that legislation only pass if parliament approves it. This is an antidemocratic element of the French constitution.
  - sofixa 3y ago
    It is antidemocratic, but it's entirely on purpose after the highly unstable Third and Fourth Republics. Therefore it was decided that it's better to have a strong president with limited powers to override democracy, over chaos, instability and lack of progress (if you have a new government every 6 months because majorities are thin and depend on multi-sided compromises that often fall apart, nothing serious can get done)
    - DiogenesKynikos 3y ago
      And now the president is using that antidemocratic element of the constitution - added as the result of a military coup - to force through a highly unpopular (a large majority of the population opposes it, which is why parliament won't pass it), highly impactful pension reform.

sofixa 3y ago

> The 1958 coup was successful. You might be confusing it with the failed 1961 coup. Indeed you're right, I'm confusing my coups. > It forces parliament to choose between deposing the government or allowing the law to go through. There's no option to simply reject the law, as would be the case in most normal democracies. Yes, that's the whole point of the 49.3 provision, for the government to be able to force legislation that parliament wouldn't agree to. That's why there are guardrails around it, like parliament having the option to bring down the government if it disagrees.

DiogenesKynikos 3y ago
Consider me old-fashioned, but I prefer that legislation only pass if parliament approves it. This is an antidemocratic element of the French constitution.
- sofixa 3y ago
  It is antidemocratic, but it's entirely on purpose after the highly unstable Third and Fourth Republics. Therefore it was decided that it's better to have a strong president with limited powers to override democracy, over chaos, instability and lack of progress (if you have a new government every 6 months because majorities are thin and depend on multi-sided compromises that often fall apart, nothing serious can get done)
  - DiogenesKynikos 3y ago
    And now the president is using that antidemocratic element of the constitution - added as the result of a military coup - to force through a highly unpopular (a large majority of the population opposes it, which is why parliament won't pass it), highly impactful pension reform.