The constitution grants the President significant powers and offers an important role in the French Republic. This role cannot be viewed in isolation. The constitutional role and responsibilities of the other arms of government have to be assed in the form of the Prime Minister and his constitutional role. There is a clear difference between the roles written into the constitution and the working roles and practices that have developed since 1958. The fundamental role of the Prime Minister is to direct government action. Article 21 of the constitution is instrumental in this role. ‘The Prime Minister shall direct the conduct of government affairs.’ The Prime Minister has a diverse range of responsibilities such as appointment of government members, definition of policy and government targets, decision-making and the implementation of policy. The President can in fact be seen to be the supervisor of the French system and the direction it takes as opposed to the Prime Minister running the government on a daily basis. ‘The government shall determine and conduct the policy of the nation.’ Placed against the Prime Ministers role then it would appear that The President is all powerful in constitutional terms in the Fifth Republic. The President is the supervisor of the general direction of the political system with the Prime Minister being appointed for administrative and implementation roles. The power for the President lies in appointment, foreign affairs, veto and referendum use and an advisory role in government.
In order to assess the power of the President in the Fifth Republic I will show an appreciation for the constitution under which the Republic was established and the political motivations of the constitution. The rise of the Fifth Republic can be traced back to the Algerian Crisis and the desperate and weak circumstances in which the previous government found themselves. De Gaulle and his own personal style were given carte blanche in drafting the new constitution and Republic and therefore it could be argued that the balance of power would always be tilted towards the President. The political environment at the time was extremely dangerous and unstable and therefore a constitution was drafted by an individual with a unique style as opposed to being drafted for the greater good of the people. Returning from exile brings a variety of issues and problems that could have been avoided. By working closely Debre, De Gaulle was able to increase the powers of the President and diminish the power of the National Assembly and the government. De Gaulle was extremely cautious of political parties and also he was very leader orientated resulting out of his republicanism. De Gaulle had an idealistic view of the relationship between himself and the people of France, christened by a strong Presidency. The power given to the President therefore rests with the hostile and unstable political environment at the time of the Constitution and also the overwhelming personal influence of De Gaulle and his ideas outlined in a political blueprint.
In theory therefore the President appears to be very powerful and influenced by the views of De Gaulle and Debre. In practice however there have been three main periods of cohabitation that have resulted in the balance of power moving away from the President towards a much more even spread of power between the two power bases. The constitution is somewhat flawed in not foreseeing the situations in which cohabitation have occurred. The President is all powerful in the Fifth Republic as long as there is not a period of cohabitation and the individuals do not have to make political compromises. The power of the President does rest with the political leadership styles of the President and the Prime Minister and their particular goals or agendas at any one particular time.
I have identified three main influences on the French political system. The idea of the strong central government is still present with deep-rooted links to the idea of monarchy. Charismatic leader sand individual styles will always prevail in the French system. There appears to have been movement in the support of the parties with a swing effect taking place. The President is much stronger in practice than he was in the French Fourth Republic. This can be illustrated by the powers outlined in the constitution and the role that the President plays in terms of defence of the political body. The President has taken responsibility in defending the institution of the realm, over French national identity and sentiment and also over the land of the Republic in terms of military defence. ‘Whatever measures are required by the circumstances for as long as required to meet the crisis.’ The President is Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, giving him a very large political presence and legitimacy. The President currently presides over the National Defence committee and also has the ability to unleash nuclear force if the circumstances arise. In terms of defence of the nation these powers are substantial. Foreign Policy and diplomatic meeting have fallen under the remit of the President as stated in Article 52 of the Constitution. There have been a variety of examples of the uses of such powers as illustrated in 1966 and 1971 European talks. A recent example of such power has been to move away from the American stance towards Iraq and maintain an isolated identity in Europe. Re starting negotiations, post war, with regards to the oil for food program is illustrative of the picking and choosing of foreign diplomatic policy..
The use of the referendum is a very useful tool for the President during non-constitutional modifications of the organisation of government. This is also very good in order to appeal over the top of political institutions directly to the people to have a very large impact. The referendum is also useful in terms of treaty ratification. The President is able to nominate one third of the Constitutional Council and refer matters to the council. The power of appointment covers judicial post, military post and also the administration of the government. The most influential of the appointment power is that of appointing the Prime Minister in Article 8. Appointment is very useful in helping the President to be more powerful and influential in the Fifth Republic by allowing him to shape the government and the general mentality of various politicians. Mitterand was very good at using his appointment powers and he did so in order to shape the exact composition of the government.
The major power base for the President was written into the constitution by De Gaulle and still carries significant weight in today’s political climate. The election of the President by direct universal suffrage was the ultimate in legitimacy for the President. If the President is directly elected it is very easy for him to spin policy and issues in terms of acting for the greater good of the people. This point is extremely clever by De Gaulle because it provides the President with a good power base when faced with opposition from the Prime Minister or other competitors. The use of this idea also allows the President to appeal directly over the heads of other government institutions directly to the people. The use of television and radio have become a major political ally for the President. Universal suffrage as introduced in 1964, ‘Power emanates directly from the people that implies that the Head of State, elected by the nation must be the source and holder of power.’ The President then has direct contact with the people and the ability to be acting for the people and with their best interests in mind. Gaining the support and the acceptance of the public is a major power for the President in the Fifth Republic and this was illustrated by De Gaulle and his first seven year period in office. Over this period De Gaulle claimed to have visited every government department and over 2500 town around the nation. This is extremely useful in portraying the image of a caring politician acting in the public interest. The idea of an untouchable politician is therefore dispelled by the Presidential role that can only work against the Prime Minister and other power bases. The use of television and radio by Mitterand was a very calculated political move in order to appeal over the heads of institutions and directly to the public. A similar role is used in the American system where the President often appeals over the head of Congress directly to the American people.
However there are drawbacks to the Presidency in practice. The President still heavily relies upon the goodwill and co-operation of the Prime Minister in order to run the country. The President has to rely on the sympathies of the government and the leadership skills and abilities of a variety of politicians in the Assembly. Due to the heavy work load and constant strains on the time of the President the role has to delegate a lot of political work and responsibilities. Delegation generally results in a certain loss of power and control over various arms of government and individuals. Cohabitation and the circumstances under which the process occurs is the major threat to the Presidency. During these three main periods of cohabitation it is clear that the President lost a certain amount of control and status to a Prime Minister of a different political persuasion. The result is that the two individuals have to co-operate and act in accordance with each other. There is therefore a huge amount of emphasis placed upon individual leadership styles and characteristics. The idea of cohabitation gives off the impression that The President’s role is not secure and written in stone. Instead under certain circumstances the President can appear extremely vulnerable with a much more flexible approach to leadership having to be adopted. The absence of a hostile majority in the Assembly appears to be essential for strong presidential government.
Cohabitation can undermine the President and this was illustrated in 1986 when Chirac was appointed as the Prime Minister. Chirac was elected upon the premise that he had a democratic angle to government with a mandate that was designed to promote democracy and working for the people. The inadequacy of the constitution to cope with a Prime Minister and President of different political persuasions was very apparent with overlapping in vital policy areas. Mitterand however appeared to show that despite a period of cohabitation the President still had a very good initiative to govern. Mitterand negotiated the composition of the government, he presided at all councils of ministers, he appointed allies to the Constitutional Council, he refused to sign, ‘ordannances’ on privatisation in July of 1986 and he re-drew the constitution boundaries in October 1986. The power of the President depends very much on the leader and whether they want to be drawn into an interventionist and antagonistic stance. Mitterand did not actively seek an interventionist stance and this was illustrated by his lack of involvement with domestic affairs. As long as the boundaries to powers and abilities are drawn up between the two leaders prior to commencement of office then it appears the Republic can run in general harmony. Political disaster will arise for the President when antagonistic positions are adopted and boundaries are not clearly defined. The Fifth Republic has proven to be extremely flexible in these periods of cohabitation with an uncomfortable dependency upon individuals as opposed to the base institutions offer. Presidents also have the power to play on the shortcomings and discrepancies of the previous Presidents in order to appeal to the people. The office of the President is held in high esteem by the people, partly because it is directly elected and therefore directly accountable to the people. The constitution is therefore helpful for guidance however practical experience and individuals decide the fate and power of the presidency.
Up until the 1986 elections both candidates were of the same political influence in office. This generally resulted in the Prime Minister being second in command and under the authority of the President, ‘systeme de governement presidentialise.’ Some candidates have been extremely critical of the idea of cohabitation arguing that the constitution would not be flexible enough to administer such a system. Raymond Barre argued that cohabitation was, ‘incompatible with the role of the President’ and it was, ‘compromission politicienne.’
Although cohabitation is un-desired by the office of the President there have been some good achievements in terms of maintaining control of the government and the general direction of the Fifth Republic. The President refused to convene a special session of Parliament on two occasions under Mitterand. The first was in 1987 over the privatisation of Renault and the second was in 1993 involving Balladur and the issue of state funding for private schools. The President also has the influence over appointment such as those for Foerign Affairs and Defence. This was illustrated when Mitterand refused two appointments in Jean Lecaneut as Minster of Foreign Affairs and Franccois Leotard as Minister for Defence. The two new approved candidates were Bernard Raimond and Andre Giraud. This situation shows the ability of the President to get his own influence over appointments. The key to the Presidency is focusing on a few areas of policy and doing them really well. It would be impossible for the President to take on every single task and delegate and maintain authority. Chirac and Mitterand performed this task very well by focusing on domestic policy, foreign affairs and defence. Their achievements in these fields were substantial whilst giving off the impression of a powerful and competent President.
It would be unfair to dismiss the role of the Prime Minister totally with various great achievements by Chirac and Balladur. The President is all powerful in the Fifth Republic during periods of conformity in political preference between the President and the National Assembly .When there are deviances away from this system as illustrated by the three periods of cohabitation then the offices are compromised with much more emphasis on flexibility of leadership styles and accommodation of other political stances.
