The Hindu : A case of two legitimacies

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Oct 03, 2002

Opinion

Opinion - News Analysis

A case of two legitimacies

By K.K. Katyal

PARIS OCT. 2. A sense of relaxation in the corridors of power can't be missed in conversations with officials and others even during a brief visit here. This is attributed to only one factor — the end of co-habitation. The Presidential and parliamentary elections earlier this year, as is known, meant control of the Presidency and a majority in the lower house of Parliament for the conservatives. Jacques Chirac was elected President for a second term while his party won the majority of seats in the National Assembly — 399 out of 577. In his previous term, Mr. Chirac had to deal with the Socialist majority in Parliament for five years.

What is the meaning, the significance, of the change? The top aide of the new Prime Minister, Jean Pierre Raffarin, says the outcome of the election is very interesting and astonishing — it dispels the impression that the French people like a "balance" of power — with the President and the Prime Minister belonging to different parties. The theory that it is good for the country to have checks and balances has been proved wrong. He calls it a case of two legitimacies — there is a personal link between the people and the President, who is directly elected, while the Prime Minister represents the expression of the majority in the National Assembly. With both belonging to the same party, it is described as a smooth division of labour. "The President represents France, gives general guidelines. The Prime Minister is to implement the guidelines." The point the aide seeks to make is that there could be tensions if the equation between them is disturbed.

The responsibilities of the French President, under the Constitution, fall into three categories. As the guardian of the Constitution, he can lay matters before the Constitutional Council, initiate constitutional review and make known his views on the interpretation of constitutional provisions. He is responsible for the proper functioning of the public authorities and the continuity of the State. And he is the guarantor of the external sovereignty of the State — he is to ensure the country's independence, the integrity of national territory and adherence to international treaties to which France is party. The main powers of the National Assembly are to adopt statutes and to supervise government policies.

As such, there is considerable scope for friction and clash — as was evident during the period of co-habitation that is just over or in the past when a Socialist President had to do business with a right-wing majority in the lower House.

On foreign policy, both the President and the Prime Minister are required to play key roles but apparently there had been no occasion for major divergences. But "beneath the veil of unanimity, there have been sharp differences". In support is cited the case of the Africa policy in the past. Mr. Chirac showed considerable sensitivity to the problems of various African countries, he had personal links and knew most of the Heads of State and, as such, showed understanding of their problems, but the outgoing Socialist Prime Minister, Lionel Jospin, took a "remote, one-sided view".

Would there have been a clash on the Iraq policy if Mr. Chirac, hypothetically speaking, had to do business with a Socialist Prime Minister? The answer is in the negative. There is a promise of greater smoothness in decision-making on foreign policy.

As regards India, Mr. Chirac had no difficulty with Mr. Jospin but "now high intensity is to be given to the relationship" with New Delhi. Normally the Prime Minister does not travel abroad (beyond the European Union). But Mr. Raffarin, though in office for a few months, has already planned a visit to India — and to China and Russia — early next year. There is no tradition of institutionalised discussions with India (unlike the other two) but nonetheless New Delhi will be his "important destination". He will be accompanied by a delegation of top French industrialists, as was the case with Mr. Chirac during his visit to India in January 1998.

(To be concluded)

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

A problematic phase

One-off phenomenon

The Cauvery dispute

Leadership in times of terror

Make farming sustainable, equitable

Speaking out of turn

A case of two legitimacies

Talk with Kashmiris

Saving the innocent

Tough laws nedded

Rectify the imbalance

Education & Industry