POWERS: DELEGATING STATE - Alain Pelletpellet.actu.com/wp-content/.../2016/02/PELLET-2000-Delegating-State... · 280 Delegating State Powers However, these very general princip les

Page 1

DE

LE

GA

TIN

G

ST

AT

E P

OW

ER

S:

The

Effe

ct o

f Tre

aty

Reg

imes

on

Dem

ocra

cy a

nd S

over

eign

ty

Edite

d by

Thom

as M

. Fran

ck

Thom

as M.

Fran

ck

Robe

rt E.

Dalto

n Di

ane B

ui Es

chrat

Rah

imi-L

aridja

ni Jer

emy

B. Zu

cker

D. A.

Jerem

y Telm

an

Krist

en B

oon

Nina

Sch

ou

Sir F

rankli

n Be

rman

Ge

org N

olte

Alain

Pell

et

Page 2

Ch

apte

r E

leve

n

A F

ren

ch C

on

stit

uti

on

al P

ersp

ecti

ve o

n T

reat

y Im

ple

men

tati

on

A Ia

in P

elle

t*

On

Janu

ary

22,

1999

, the

Fre

nch

Con

seil

Con

stit

utio

nnel

iss

ued

a de

ci si

on

by w

hich

it

Dec

ides

: A

rtic

le 1

: Aut

hori

zatio

n to

rat

ify

the

Tre

aty

inco

rpor

atin

g th

e St

atut

e o

f the

In

tern

atio

nal

Cri

min

al C

ourt

dem

ands

a re

vis i

on o

f the

Con

stitu

tion.

l

Thi

s m

eans

tha

t the

Fre

nch

Con

stit

utio

n m

ust b

e am

ende

d be

fore

Fra

nce

rat­

ifie

s th

e S

tatu

te o

f R

ome,

as

it h

as b

een

amen

ded

twic

e du

ring

rec

ent

year

s in

or

der

to e

nabl

e ra

tifi

cati

on o

f the

Tre

atie

s o

f Maa

stri

cht

and

Am

ster

dam

,2 w

hich

cr

eate

and

str

engt

hen

the

Eur

opea

n U

nion

. T

his

call

s fo

r so

me

expl

anat

ions

abo

ut t

he r

elat

ions

bet

wee

n th

e F

renc

h C

onst

itut

ion

and

inte

rnat

iona

llaw

, an

d m

ore

spec

ific

ally

, tr

eatie

s.

Acc

ordi

ng t

o pa

ragr

aphs

14

and

15 o

f th

e P

ream

ble

to t

he C

onst

itut

ion

of

1946

, whi

ch is

mad

e pa

rt o

f the

Con

stit

utio

n o

f Oct

ober

4,

1958

, by

the

Pre

ambl

e to

the

lat

ter:

The

Fre

nch

Rep

ubli

c, f

aith

ful

to i

ts t

radi

tion

, sh

all

obse

rve

the

rule

s o

f pub

lic

inte

rnat

iona

llaw

[in

tern

atio

nal

publ

ic l

aw].

...

Sub

ject

to r

ecip

roci

ty,

Fra

nce

wil

l co

nsen

t to

suc

h li

mit

atio

ns o

f so

v­er

eign

ty a

s ar

e ne

cess

ary

to t

he r

eali

zati

on o

f th

e de

fens

e o

f pe

ace.

3

* Pr

ofes

sor,

Uni

vers

ity

of P

aris

X-N

ante

rre

and

Inst

itut

d'E

tude

s po

liti

ques

de

Pari

s; M

embe

r an

d fo

rmer

Cha

irm

an,

Inte

rnat

iona

l L

aw C

omm

issi

on. 1

wis

h to

tha

nk h

eart

ily

Pro

fess

or T

hom

as

M.

Fra

nck

for

his

corr

ecti

ons

ofm

y E

ngli

sh a

nd h

is h

elpf

ul r

emar

ks o

n a

firs

t dr

aft

oft

his

pap

er.

1 D

ecis

ion

No.

98-

-408

OC

, no

t ye

t pu

blis

hed.

My

tran

slat

ion.

2

See

disc

ussi

on,

infr

a.

) U

nles

s ot

herw

ise

indi

cate

d, t

rans

lati

ons

of

the

Fre

nch

text

s ar

e fr

om a

boo

klet

edi

ted

by

the

Con

seil

con

stit

utio

nnel

: C

onst

itut

iona

l C

ase

Law

: C

omm

unit

y L

aw

an

d I

mm

igra

tion

Act

s,

(Par

is,

1998

). lt

stat

es:

"The

Eng

lish

tra

nsla

tion

doe

s no

t ha

ve o

ffic

ial

stan

ding

"; m

y ow

n ob

jec­

tion

s to

the

se t

rans

lati

ons

are

men

tion

ed b

etw

een

squa

re b

rack

ets.

279

Page 3

280

Del

egat

ing

Stat

e P

ower

s

How

ever

, th

ese

very

gen

eral

pri

ncip

les

are

spec

ifie

d in

the

body

of t

he 1

958

Con

stit

utio

n it

self

, at

lea

st a

s fa

r as

tre

atie

s ar

e co

ncer

ned.

4 T

he r

elev

ant m

Ies

are

incl

uded

in

Art

icle

s 52

to

55,

incl

uded

in

Tit

le V

I, "

Tre

atie

s an

d In

tern

atio

nal

Agr

eem

ents

."5

Acc

ordi

ng t

o th

ese

prov

isio

ns,

a tr

eaty

is

nego

tiat

ed b

y th

e P

resi

dent

of t

he

Rep

ubli

c (o

r in

his

nam

e) a

nd r

atif

ied

by h

im (

Art

icle

52)

, if

nec

essa

ry "

in p

ur­

suan

ce o

f an

Act

in

Par

liam

ent"

(A

rtic

le 5

36 )

or a

fter

a r

efer

endu

m (

Art

icle

s Il

an

d 53

, pa

ragr

aph

2).

The

n,

Fro

m th

e m

omen

t o

f the

ir p

ubli

cati

on,

trea

ties

or

agre

emen

ts d

uly

rat­

ifie

d or

app

rove

d sh

aH p

reva

il o

ver A

cts

in P

arli

amen

t su

bjec

t, fo

r ea

ch

agre

emen

t or

trea

ty,

to r

ecip

roca

l ap

plic

atio

n by

the

oth

er p

arty

.?

4 B

y co

ntr

ast,

th

e si

len

ce o

f th

e C

on

stit

uti

on

reg

ard

ing

the

sta

tute

of

inte

rnat

ion

al c

us­

tom

ary

law

is

a so

urc

e o

f di

ffic

ulti

es a

nd

unc

erta

inti

es.

Whi

le,

curi

ousl

y, t

he C

onse

il c

onst

i­tu

tion

nel,

whi

ch,

in c

on

trad

icti

on

wit

h th

e cl

ear

text

of

art.

55

of t

he C

onst

itut

ion

(see

bel

ow),

do

es n

ot s

ecur

e re

spec

t fo

r th

e su

peri

orit

y o

f tr

eati

es o

ver

acts

in

Par

liam

ent

(see

, e.

g.,

Dec

isio

n N

o. 7

4-5

4,

Jan.

15,

197

5, "

Abo

rtio

n C

ase,

" C

C R

ep.

19;

see

com

men

ts b

y G

. D

rues

ne,

R,M

. C.

1975

.285

; L

. F

avor

eu a

nd L

. P

hili

p, R

.D,P

. 19

75.1

87;

C.

Fra

nck,

R.G

.D.I

.P.

1975

,107

0; H

amon

, D

. 19

75,5

29;

A.

Pel

let,

G.P

. Ja

n. 1

4-1

5,

1976

, at

9;

J. R

ivér

o, A

.J.D

.A.

1975

.134

an

d D

. R

uzié

, JO

.!.

1975

.249

), i

t do

es c

hec

k t

hat

Act

s in

Par

liam

ent

are

not

inco

nsis

tent

wit

h g

ener

al p

rin­

cip

les

of

inte

rnat

ion

al l

aw (

see,

e.g

., D

ecis

ion

s N

o. 7

5-5

9,

Dec

. 30

, 19

75,

Cas

e co

nce

rnin

g

May

otte

, C

C R

ep.

26;

see

also

com

men

ts b

y L

. F

avor

eu,

R.D

.P.

1976

.537

; H

amon

, D

. 19

76.5

38;

G,P

. 1 9

76.I

I.48

0; J

.C.

Mae

stre

, R

.D,P

. 43

1; L

. P

hili

p, R

.D.P

. 19

76.9

95;

F. S

udre

, R

. G.D

.I.P

. 19

76.1

63;

D.

Ruz

ié,

JD.!

. 19

76.4

05 a

nd D

ecis

ion

No.

82

-13

9,

Feb

. II

, 19

82,

Cas

e co

nce

rn­

ing

Exp

ropr

iati

ons,

CC

Rep

. 31

; se

e al

so c

omm

ents

by

L.

Fav

oreu

, R

.D.P

. 19

82.3

77;

B.

Gol

dman

, JD

f.

19

82

.27

5;

Ham

on

, D

.S.

1983

, ch

ron

.79

; N

gu

yen

Qu

oc

Vin

h, a

nd F

ran

ck,

R.G

.D.I

.P.

1982

.349

; R

ivér

o, A

.J.D

,A.

1982

.202

). O

n th

e co

ntra

ry,

the

Con

seil

d'É

tat

has

rece

ntly

dec

ided

th

at i

nte

rnat

ion

al c

ust

om

ary

rul

es d

o no

t pr

evai

l ov

er a

cts

in P

arli

amen

t (s

ee e

.g.,

CE

, A

ss.,

A

quar

one,

R, G

,O.I

.P.

1997

.596

; se

e al

so c

oncl

usio

ns o

f G

. B

ache

lier

, id

. an

d R

.FD

.A.

1997

.585

an

d co

mm

ents

by

D.

All

and,

R,G

.D.I

.P.

1998

.207

and

D.

Cha

uvau

x an

d T

.X,

Gir

ardo

t, A

.J.D

.A.

1997

.482

).

5 A

cco

rdin

g t

o th

e F

renc

h C

onst

itut

ion,

tre

atie

s ar

e su

bjec

t to

rat

ific

atio

n pr

oper

ly s

aid;

in

tern

atio

nal

agre

emen

ts a

re "

appr

oved

" by

the

Gov

ernm

ent.

1 w

ill

focu

s he

re o

n "t

reat

ies.

" 6

Art

. 53

enu

mer

ates

the

kin

ds o

f tr

eati

es (

or i

nter

nati

onal

agr

eem

ents

) w

hich

mus

t be

fir

st

refe

rred

to

the

Par

liam

ent;

the

y ar

e: "

Pea

ce t

reat

ies,

tra

de a

gree

men

ts,

trea

ties

or

agre

emen

ts

con

cern

ing

in

tern

atio

nal

org

aniz

atio

ns [

in t

he F

renc

h te

xt,

"org

anis

atio

n" i

s in

the

sin

gula

r],

thos

e im

plyi

ng a

com

mit

men

t o

f na

tion

al r

esou

rces

, th

ose

amen

din

g ru

les

of

a le

gisl

ativ

e na

ture

, th

ose

con

cern

ing

per

sona

l st

atus

, an

d th

ose

call

ing

for

the

tran

sfer

, ex

chan

ge o

r an

nexa

tion

of

terr

itor

y";

see

my

com

men

t in

F. L

UC

HA

IRE

AN

D G

. C

ON

AC

, LA

CO

NST

ITU

TIO

N D

E LA

RÉP

UB

LIQ

UE

FRA

NÇ

AIS

E, 1

00

5-1

05

8 (

1987

).

7 A

fter

a l

ong

peri

od o

f he

sita

tion

, th

e C

our

de C

assa

tion

(C

ass.

Civ

l, C

h. m

ixte

, So

ciét

é "C

afé

Jacq

ues

Fab

re,"

Bul

l. 6

; se

e al

so c

oncl

usio

ns b

y J.

Tou

ffai

t, D

.197

5.J.

497

and

com

men

ts

by 1

. B

oulo

uis,

A.J

.D.A

. 19

75.5

67;

G.

Dru

esne

, R

.M.C

. 19

75.1

; Je

ante

t, J

c.P

. 19

75.1

1.18

180;

N

guye

n Q

uoc

Din

h, A

.FD

.!.

1975

.859

; J.

Pir

otte

-Ger

ouvi

lle,

R.T

.O.E

. 19

76.2

15;

R.C

., G

.P.,

2,

p. 4

70;

Ch.

Rou

ssea

u, R

. G.D

.I.P

. 19

76.9

60 B

nd D

. R

uzié

, J.D

,I,

1975

.801

) th

en t

he

Con

seil

d'É

­ta

t (C

.E.,

Ass

., 2

0 O

ct.

1989

, N

icol

o, L

lth.

748;

see

afsQ

co

ncl

usi

on

s by

Fri

edm

an,

id.;

J c

.P.

1989

.11.

2137

1; R

.FD

.A.

1989

.813

an

d R

.C.D

./,P

. 1<

)89.

1043

an

d c

om

mcn

ts b

y J.

Bo

ulo

uis

, R

.G O

.l.P

. 19

90.9

1,;

Cla

vet,

JC

P.

1990

.1.3

429;

Ch

aban

ol,

G.P

. N

ov.

12,

1989

; J.

Deh

auss

y,

.J.D

.I.

1990

.5;

Gen

evoi

s, F

avor

eu a

nd

Dub

ouis

, R

.FD

.A.

19

89

.82

4,9

93

an

d 1

000;

Ho

no

rat

et

Bap

tist

e, A

.JO

.A.

1989

.576

; G

. Is

aac,

R.T

D.E

. 19

89.7

71;

Kov

ar,

D.

1990

.57;

Lac

haum

e, A

.FD

.I.

A F

renc

h P

ersp

ecti

ve o

n T

reat

y Im

plem

enta

tion

28

1

ln th

e m

eant

ime,

it m

ay h

appe

n th

at th

e C

onse

il c

onst

itut

ionn

el b

e co

nsul

ted

on t

he g

roun

d o

f Art

icle

54

of t

he C

onst

itut

ion:

If,

upon

the

req

uest

of

the

Pre

side

nt o

f th

e R

epub

lic,

the

Pri

me

Min

iste

r or

the

Pre

side

nt o

f on

e or

oth

er H

ouse

or

sixt

y de

puti

es o

r si

xt Y

sen

ator

s, t

he C

onst

itut

iona

l C

ounc

il h

as r

uled

tha

t an

int

erna

­ti

onal

agr

eem

ent

cont

ains

a c

laus

e co

ntra

ry to

the

con

stit

utio

n, t

he r

at­

ific

atio

n or

app

rova

l o

f th

is i

nter

nati

onal

agr

eem

ent

shaH

not

be

auth

oriz

ed u

ntil

the

Con

stit

utio

n ha

s be

en r

evis

ed.

Thi

s is

an

inte

rest

ing

atte

mpt

to a

void

a c

ontr

adic

tion

bet

wee

n in

tern

atio

nal

com

mit

men

ts e

nter

ed i

nto

by F

ranc

e an

d th

e co

nsti

tuti

onal

req

uire

men

ts:8

Art

icle

54

doe

s no

t im

pede

Fra

nce

to c

oncl

ude

trea

ties

whi

ch a

re a

t va

rian

ce w

ith

the

Con

stit

utio

n at

the

tim

e o

f the

ir s

igna

ture

; bu

t if

this

hap

pens

, th

e tr

eaty

in

ques

­ti

on m

ay b

e ra

tifi

ed o

nly

afte

r an

am

endm

ent

of

the

Con

stit

utio

n, w

hich

mus

t be

pass

ed b

y bo

th H

ouse

s o

f Par

liam

ent

and

beco

mes

eff

ecti

ve a

fter

app

rova

l by

ref

­er

endu

m o

r by

the

"C

ongr

ess"

(th

at i

s th

e tw

o H

ouse

s o

f P

arli

amen

t m

eeti

ng

toge

ther

) by

a t

hree

-fif

ths

maj

orit

y o

f th

e vo

tes

cast

.9

The

abo

ve-m

enti

oned

dec

isio

n in

the

case

con

cern

ing

the

Rom

e St

atut

elO

is

base

d on

Art

icle

54

of t

he F

renc

h C

onst

itut

ion

and

is m

otiv

ated

by

inco

mpa

tibi

l­it

ies

foun

d by

the

Cou

ncil

bet

wee

n so

rne

Art

icle

s in

the

Sta

tute

of t

he I

nter

nati

onal

C

rim

inal

Cou

rt (

here

afte

r "I

.C.C

.")

on t

he o

ne h

and

and

seve

ral

Art

icle

s in

the

C

onst

itut

ion

on t

he o

ther

han

d. A

rtic

le 6

8 o

f th

e C

onst

itut

ion

prov

ides

for

the

im

mun

ity

of t

he P

resi

dent

of t

he R

epub

lic

exce

pt i

n ca

se o

f hig

h tr

easo

n, i

n w

hich

in

stan

ce h

e ca

n on

ly b

e tr

ied

by t

he H

igh

Cou

rt o

f Ju

stic

e af

ter

an i

ndic

tmen

t by

the

two

Hou

ses

of t

he P

arli

amen

t; A

rtic

le 6

8-1

give

s ex

clus

ive

juri

sdic

tion

to t

he

Cou

rt o

f Ju

stic

e o

f th

e R

epub

lic

in o

rder

to t

ry M

embe

rs o

f the

Gov

ernm

ent

for

cert

ain

crim

inal

act

s pe

rfor

med

in t

he e

xerc

ise

of t

heir

dut

ies;

whi

le,

by v

irtu

e o

f A

rtic

le 2

6, M

embe

rs o

f th

e P

arli

amen

t en

joy

a sp

ecia

l re

gim

e o

f pe

nall

iabi

lity

an

d ju

dgm

ent.

AH

the

se p

rovi

sion

s w

ere

decl

ared

inco

mpa

tibl

e w

ith

Art

icle

27

of

the

Sta

tute

of

the

1. C

. C.

whi

ch r

ecog

nize

s no

im

mun

ity

befo

re t

he I

nter

nati

onal

C

rim

inal

Cou

rt f

or H

eads

of

Sta

tes

or o

f G

over

nmen

ts o

r M

embe

rs o

f G

over

n­m

ent

or P

arli

amen

t by

virt

ue o

f the

ir o

ffic

ial

posi

tion

. S

imil

arly

, w

hile

the

Cou

ncil

did

not

see

any

con

stit

utio

nal

prob

lem

reg

ard­

ing

thos

e pr

ovis

ions

of t

he S

tatu

te o

f the

Cou

rt t

hat

rela

te t

o th

e "c

ompl

emen

tar­

ity"

bet

wee

n it

s ow

n ju

risd

icti

on a

nd t

hat

of

the

nati

onal

Cou

rts,

it

sees

con

flic

t

1990

.945

an

d R

.M. C

. 19

90.3

84;

Lag

arde

, R

.C.D

.I.P

. 19

90.1

25;

Nég

rier

an

d T

ouch

ard,

R.D

.P.

1990

.767

; P.

Ram

baud

, A

FD

.l.

1989

.91;

Sab

ouri

n, D

. 19

90.1

35;

D.

Sim

on,

A.J

.D,A

. 19

89.7

88;

Tou

char

d, R

,D,P

. 19

90.8

01)

have

mad

e tr

eati

es p

reva

il o

ver

acts

in

Par

liam

ent,

eve

n if

the

latt

er

wer

e su

bseq

uent

in

tim

e.

S H

owev

er,

ther

e is

no

auto

mat

icit

y: i

t co

uld

happ

en t

hat

none

of t

he a

utho

riti

es e

ntit

led

to

refe

r a

trea

ty c

on

trar

y t

o t

he

Co

nst

itu

tio

n t

o th

e C

on

stit

uti

on

al C

ou

nci

l. I

n s

uch

a c

ase,

th

e C

onst

itut

ion

wil

l pr

evai

l be

fore

Fre

nch

Cou

rts

(see

inf

ra n

ote

55) .

9

Art

. 89

of

the

Con

stit

utio

n.

10

See

supr

a no

te 1

.

Page 4

282

Del

egat

ing

Stat

e P

ower

s

betw

een

the

Con

stit

utio

n an

d ot

her

prov

isio

ns o

f the

Sta

tute

whi

ch m

ake

subj

ect

to t

he C

ourt

's ju

risd

icti

on p

ers o

ns w

ho c

omm

itte

d ac

ts c

over

ed b

y am

nest

y or

pre

­sc

ript

ion

acco

rdin

g to

Fre

nch

law

. The

Con

stit

utio

nal

Cou

ncil

als

o sa

w a

pot

enti

al

conf

lict

bet

wee

n F

renc

h co

nsti

tuti

onal

law

and

Art

icle

99,

par

agra

ph 4

, o

f th

e L

e.e.

Sta

tute

, w

hich

all

ows

the

Pro

secu

tor

of

the

Cou

rt to

set

up

inve

stig

atio

ns

on F

renc

h te

rrit

ory

wit

hout

the

par

tici

pati

on o

f the

Fre

nch

judi

cial

aut

hori

ties

. In

bo

th c

ases

, it

dec

lare

s th

at th

ese

prov

isio

ns a

re "

of a

nat

ure

such

as

to j

eopa

rdiz

e th

e es

sent

ial

cond

itio

ns f

or t

he e

xerc

ise

of n

atio

nal

sove

reig

nty.

" 1 1

Thi

s fo

rmul

atio

n o

f th

e C

ounc

il's

obj

ect

ions

is

not

new

. It

ent

ered

int

o th

e F

renc

h co

nsti

tuti

onal

cor

pus

wit

h an

othe

r an

d m

ore

inno

cuou

s de

cisi

on o

f th

e C

onst

itut

iona

l C

ounc

il i

n 19

70,

whe

n it

dec

lare

d th

at "

the

Dec

isio

n [o

f th

e C

ounc

il o

f the

EE

C]

of A

pril

21,

197

0, r

elat

ing

to t

he r

epla

cem

ent

of

the

fina

n­ci

al c

ontr

ibut

ions

of M

embe

r S

tate

s by

the

Com

mun

itie

s' o

wn

reso

urce

s ca

n, n

ei­

ther

by

its n

atur

e no

r by

its

impo

rtan

ce, j

eopa

rdiz

e th

e es

sent

ial

cond

itio

ns f

or t

he

exer

cise

of

nati

onal

sov

erei

gnty

.":2

The

sam

e fo

rmul

a ha

s su

bseq

uent

ly b

een

inse

rted

in s

ever

al (

but n

ot a

Il) d

ecis

ions

mad

e by

the

Cou

ncil

rel

atin

g to

the

con

­st

itut

iona

lity

of

trea

ties

. It

fea

ture

s in

the

onl

y tw

o ot

her

deci

sion

s by

whi

ch i

t de

clar

ed

that

tr

eati

es

sign

ed

by

Fra

nce

wer

e no

t in

co

nfor

mit

y w

ith

the

Con

stit

utio

n. I

n ea

ch in

stan

ce,

the

Fre

nch

Con

stit

utio

n ha

d to

be

amen

ded

befo

re

the

trea

ties

(vi

z. t

he T

reat

ies

of M

aast

rich

tl3 a

nd A

mst

erda

ml4

mod

ifyi

ng t

he E

C

Tre

aty)

cou

ld b

e ra

tifi

ed.

Thi

s C

onst

itut

iona

l C

ounc

il's

for

mul

atio

n co

nsti

tute

s a

com

men

dabl

e at

tem

pt t

o re

conc

ile

the

Fre

nch

Con

stit

utio

n's

text

wit

h th

e re

quir

emen

ts o

f in

tern

atio

nal

coop

erat

ion

in t

he m

oder

n w

orld

. It

als

o se

eks

to r

econ

cile

the

"d

omes

tic

noti

on"

of

sove

reig

nty

wit

h th

e m

eani

ng o

f th

e sa

me

conc

ept

unde

r in

tern

atio

nal

law

. A

s a

mat

ter

of f

act,

the

wor

d "s

over

eign

ty"

do es

not

hav

e th

e sa

me

mea

ning

in

the

fra

mew

ork

of

inte

rnat

iona

l so

ciet

y as

it

has

wit

hin

the

Stat

e. W

hile

, at

the

na

tion

al l

evel

, th

ere

is o

nly

one

sove

reig

n (w

heth

er t

he p

eopl

e, t

he n

atio

n, t

he

Il

My

tran

slat

ion.

12

D

ecis

ion

No

. 70

-39

, L

uxem

bour

g T

reat

y o

f 22

Apr

il 1

970

mod

ifyi

ng b

udge

tary

pro

visi

ons

il! t

he T

reat

ies

inst

itut

ing

the

Eur

opea

n C

omm

unit

ies,

C. C

. R

ep.

15;

see

also

com

men

ts b

y C

h.

Rou

ssea

u, R

. G.D

.I.P

. 19

71.2

41 a

nd D

. R

uzié

, 1.

c.P

. 19

70.1

.235

4; m

y tr

ansl

atio

n.

13

Dec

isio

n 9

2-3

08

, A

pr.

9, 1

992,

C. C

. R

ep.

55;

in E

ngli

sh:

CC

, C

onst

itut

iona

l C

ase

La

w

(fn.

3),

at

47;

see

a/so

co

mm

ents

by

C.

Blu

man

n, R

.M.C

.UE

. 19

94.3

93;

R.

Eti

en,

Rev

. ad

m.

1992

.126

; L

. F

avor

eu,

R.F

D C

. 19

92.3

34 a

nd 3

89 a

nd R

.G.D

.I.P

. 19

93.3

9; P

. G

aia,

R.F

D.C

. 19

92.3

98;

B.

Gen

evoi

s, R

.FD

.A.

1992

.373

; J.P

. Ja

cqué

, R

. T.D

.E.

1992

.251

; F.

Luc

hair

e, R

.D.P

. 19

92.5

89;

B.

Mat

hieu

and

M.

Ver

peau

, L

es P

etit

es A

ffic

hes,

Jun

e 26

,199

2, a

t 6;

E.

Pic

ard,

R.F

D.A

. 1

99

34

7 a

nd A

.JD

.A.

1993

.151

; 1.

Rid

eau,

R.A

.E.

1992

, N

o.3,

at

7; D

. S

imon

, E

urop

e, m

ai 1

992;

an

d N

. V

an T

uong

, 1.c

.P.

1992

.Il.

2185

3.

14

Dec

isio

n N

o. 9

7-3

94

, D

ec.

31,

1997

, C

c.

Rep

.344

; in

Eng

lish

: C

C,

Con

stit

utio

nal

Cas

e L

aw

(fn

. 3)

, at

62;

see

a/s

a co

mm

ents

by

L. B

aghe

stan

i-P

erre

y, P

A.

June

22,

199

8, a

t 15

; P.

Bon

, id

., Ju

ne 1

9, 1

998,

at

17;

F. C

halt

iel,

R.M

.C.U

E.

1998

.73;

P. G

aïa,

R.F

D.C

. 19

98.1

42; T

. L

arzu

l,

DA

. 1

99

8-2

.17;

F.

Luc

hair

e, R

.D.P

. 19

98.3

31;

A.

Pel

let,

Cah

iers

C.C

. 19

98,

No.

4,

at 1

13;

D.

Ric

hard

, G

.P.

Jun

e 1

7-1

8,1

99

8,

at 2

; J.

E.

Sch

oett

l, A

.J.D

.A.

1998

.135

; va

rii,

"L

e T

rait

é d

'Am

ster

dam

fac

e au

x co

nsti

tuti

ons

nati

onal

es,"

Doc

. F

., 19

98.

A F

renc

h P

ersp

ecti

ve o

n T

reat

y Im

plem

enta

tion

28

3

Kin

g or

the

Sta

te i

tsel

f doe

s no

t m

atte

r he

re:

the

fact

is

that

the

sov

erei

gn is

one

an

d on

ly o

ne),

on

the

othe

r han

cl,

the

inte

rnat

iona

l so

ciet

y is

mad

e up

of s

orne

two

hund

red

"sov

erei

gns.

" A

s th

e A

rbit

rati

on C

omm

issi

on f

or F

orm

er Y

ugos

lavi

a no

ted:

"th

e S

tate

is

com

mon

ly d

efin

ed a

s a

com

mun

ity

whi

ch c

onsi

sts

of a

ter

ri­

tory

and

a p

opul

atio

n su

bjec

t to

an o

rgan

ized

pol

itic

al a

utho

rity

, ..

. su

ch a

Sta

te

is c

hara

cter

ized

by

sove

reig

nty.

"15

ln o

ther

wor

ds,

in t

he s

pher

e o

f in

tern

atio

nal

law

, so

vere

ignt

y is

the

ver

y cr

iter

ion

of s

tate

hood

; a

sove

reig

n en

tity

is a

Sta

te a

nd,

as a

mat

ter

of d

efin

itio

n, a

Sta

te is

a s

over

eign

ent

ity.

Thi

s m

akes

a p

heno

men

al d

iffe

renc

e. I

nsid

e th

e S

tate

, so

vere

ignt

y m

eans

a

supr

eme

and

(leg

ally

) un

chal

leng

ed p

ower

and

, as

Pro

fess

or P

rosp

er W

eil

put

it in

hi

s ou

tsta

ndin

g in

trod

ucti

on to

Fre

nch

adm

inis

trat

ive

law

, "t

he v

ery

exis

tenc

e o

f ao

adm

inis

trat

ive

law

is a

kin

d o

f mira

cle.

"16

By

cont

rast

, at

the

int

erna

tion

alle

vel,

so

vere

ignt

ies

are

equa

l w

hich

nec

essa

rily

im

plie

s th

at e

ach

Sta

te's

juri

sdic

tion

is

lim

ited

by

the

equa

l ri

ghts

bel

ongi

ng t

o aI

l ot

her

Stat

es.

Thi

s co

ntra

st is

ref

lect

ed i

n th

e F

renc

h C

onst

itut

ion.

W

hile

Art

icle

3 d

ecla

res:

"N

atio

nal

sove

reig

nty

resi

des

in t

he p

eopl

e w

ho

exer

cise

it t

hrou

gh t

heir

rep

rese

ntat

ives

and

by

the

way

of r

efer

endu

m,"

par

agra

ph

15 o

f the

Pre

ambl

e to

the

194

6 C

onst

itut

ion

cont

empl

ates

tha

t F

ranc

e m

ay "

con­

sent

to

such

lim

itat

ions

of

sove

reig

nty

as a

re n

eces

sary

to

the

real

izat

ion

of

the

defe

nse

of p

eace

." 17

T

he f

irst

quo

ted

prov

isio

n co

nfir

ms

that

ins

ide

the

Sta

te t

here

is

only

one

so

vere

ign:

"th

e pe

ople

." O

n th

e ot

her

hand

, at

the

int

erna

tion

alle

vel,

Fra

nce

rec­

ogni

zes

poss

ible

"li

mit

s" to

its

sov

erei

gnty

. In

deed

thi

s is

not

a v

ery

conv

inci

ng w

ordi

ng:

as e

xpla

ined

abo

ve,

sove

r­ei

gnty

is t

he v

ery

crit

erio

n o

f sta

teho

od;

it c

ao b

e ne

ithe

r "t

rans

ferr

ed"

nor

"lim

­it

ed."

AS

tate

can

not

be "

half

-sov

erei

gn";

if

it is

aS

tate

, it

enjo

ys s

over

eign

ty;

if

it tr

ansf

ers

its s

over

eign

ty,

it is

no

mor

e a

Stat

e. A

s th

e P

erm

anen

t C

ourt

exp

lain

ed

in i

ts f

irst

Jud

gmen

t, "

the

righ

t o

f en

teri

ng i

nto

inte

rnat

iona

l en

gage

men

ts i

s an

at

trib

ute

of S

tate

sov

erei

gnty

" an

d "t

he c

oncl

usio

n o

f an

y tr

eaty

by

whi

ch a

Sta

te

unde

rtak

es to

per

form

or

refr

ain

from

per

form

ing

a pa

rtic

ular

act

[ca

nnot

be

seen

as

] an

aba

ndon

men

t o

f so

vere

ignt

y."1

8 ln

oth

er w

ord,

sov

erei

gnty

is

the

basi

s o

f st

ate

com

pete

ncie

s an

d, b

y co

nclu

ding

a tr

eaty

, aS

tate

doe

s no

t lim

it, o

r ab

ando

n,

or t

rans

fer

its s

over

eign

ty;

it ex

erci

ses

the

righ

ts d

eriv

ing

from

its

sov

erei

gnty

. F

or t

his

sam

e re

ason

, 1

have

sor

ne r

eser

vati

ons

rega

rdin

g th

e ti

tle

of

this

st

udy.

Sta

tes

may

del

egat

e po

wer

s, o

r, ra

ther

, th

e ex

erci

se o

f so

rne

of

thei

r po

w­

ers,

but

they

can

not

"del

egat

e" t

heir

sov

erei

gnty

.19

15

Adv

isor

y O

pini

on N

o. 1

, N

ov.

29,

1991

, I.

L.M

. 19

92.1

494

[em

phas

is a

dded

].

16

Le

droi

t a

dm

inis

tra

tif3

(l6

th.

ed.

1994

, w

ith

D.

Pou

yaud

); m

y tr

ansl

atio

n.

17

See

full

tex

t, s

upra

not

e 3.

18

S

.S.

Wim

bled

on C

ase,

P.C

.U.,

(se

r. A

) N

o. 1

, at

25

[em

phas

is a

dded

].

19

ln t

his

resp

ect,

the

LC

.J.

decl

ared

tha

t M

oroc

co,

whi

le u

nder

the

Fre

nch

prot

ecto

rate

, ha

d "r

etai

ned

its p

erso

nali

ty a

s a

Stat

e in

int

erna

tion

al l

aw"

(Jud

gmen

t o

f Aug

. 27

, 19

52, U

.S.

Nat

iona

ls

in M

oroc

co,

I.C

.J.

Rep

. 19

52,

at 1

85 [

emph

asis

add

ed].

1 h

ave

doub

t th

at t

his

is i

n ke

epin

g w

ith

the

mod

ern

defi

niti

on o

f st

ateh

ood.

Page 5

284

Del

egat

ing

Stat

e P

ower

s

In t

his

resp

ect-

tho

ug

h,

in F

ran

ce a

s in

oth

er S

tate

s, t

he d

ebat

e is

oft

en

Jhra

sed

in t

erm

s o

f lo

ss o

f so

vere

ign

ty b

y th

e ex

trem

e ri

ght

poli

tica

l p

art

ies­

he q

uest

ion

is r

elev

ant

to F

ranc

e's

Mem

ber

ship

of

the

Eur

opea

n U

nion

. B

y d

el­

!gat

ing

prog

ress

ivel

y m

ore

an

d m

ore

pow

ers

to t

he C

om

mu

nit

ies

and

/or

the

~.u.,

in i

mp

ort

ant

and

mo

re a

nd

mor

e di

vers

ifie

d fi

elds

, w

ill

ther

e n

ot

be

a )O

int

whe

n th

e "s

over

eign

ty"

of

Mem

ber

Sta

tes

wil

l be

com

e an

em

pty

she

ll f

or

vant

of

"att

ribu

tes"

?20

Thi

s so

rt o

f ar

gum

ent

was

mad

e by

the

Sen

ator

s w

ho i

niti

ated

the

sec

ond

'efe

rral

con

cern

ing

the

Tre

aty

on t

he E

urop

ean

Uni

on (

Maa

stri

cht

II),

aft

er t

he

evis

ion

of t

he C

onst

itut

ion

enac

ted

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith

the

deci

sion

in M

aast

rich

t ',2

1 T

hey

proc

eede

d "f

rom

the

conc

ept t

hat

the

Fre

nch

cons

titu

tion

al o

rder

is c

on­

.truc

ted

arou

nd th

e ce

ntra

l no

tion

of n

atio

nal

sove

reig

nty

to a

sk th

e C

onst

itut

iona

l :::

ounc

il ho

w f

ar i

t is

pos

sibl

e to

go

wit

h re

visi

ons

of t

he C

onst

itut

ion

to e

ffec

t suc

­:e

ssÎv

e in

road

s in

to 'th

e es

sent

ial

cond

itio

ns f

or t

he e

xerc

ise

of s

over

eign

ty.

"22

In

his

cas

e th

e C

ounc

il w

as a

ble

to

avoi

d co

nfro

ntin

g th

eir

impl

ied

argu

men

t aga

inst

lr

oad

gran

ts o

fpo

wer

s to

the

sup

rana

tion

al s

yste

m o

n th

e gT

ound

tha

l 'A

rtic

le 5

4 ,f

the

Con

stit

utio

n ..

. co

nfer

s ju

risd

icti

oD o

n d

le C

onsh

tuti

onal

Cou

nci

] sol

ely

to

scer

lain

whe

ther

a g

iven

int

erna

tion

al a

gree

men

t re

ferr

ed t

o do

es o

r do

es n

ot

onta

in c

laus

es c

ontr

ary

to t

he C

onst

itut

ion.

" It

is,

how

ever

, th

e vi

ew o

f th

e pr

esen

t w

cite

r: f

irst

th

at t

be

ques

tion

can

not

'c d

isre

gard

ed f

orev

er a

nd a

n an

swer

eve

ntua

Uy

wil

l ha

ve t

o be

gÏv

en;

ane!

, se

c­on

d tb

at,

tor

the

mom

ent

Mem

ber

Sta

tes

of t

he E

uro

pea

n U

nion

are

sti

ll SO

ver­

ign,

if

only

bec

ause

tbey

ret

ajn

tbei

r m

onop

oly

in t

Jle

use

of f

orce

d co

erci

on;

bu

t la

t, i

n th

e lo

ng r

un,

lhe

Com

mun

itie

s st

ruct

ure

will

mov

e to

war

ds f

eder

alis

m.

At

lis

stag

e, w

hich

has

not

yet

bee

n re

ache

e!,

Mem

bers

of t

he C

omm

unit

ies

wil

l ha

ve

ease

d to

be

Sta

tes

in t

he w

ord'

s in

tern

atio

nal

leg

al m

eani

ng.

Mem

bers

Sta

tes,

le

n, w

ill

not

have

"de

lega

ted"

the

ir s

over

eign

ty;

they

wil

l si

mpl

y an

d pu

rely

hav

e ~a

nsferr

ed i

t to

a n

ew s

tate

ent

ity.2

3

Aft

er y

ears

of

appr

oxim

ate

and

ques

tion

able

for

mul

atio

ns,

this

ana

lysi

s is

ha

red

by t

he C

onse

il c

onst

itut

ionn

el s

ince

Maa

stri

cht

1. In

thi

s de

cisi

on,

the

:oun

cil

said

:

It f

ollo

ws

from

the

se v

ario

us i

nsti

tuti

onal

[si

c-co

nsti

tuti

onal

?] p

rovi

­si

ons

[24]

that

res

pect

for

nat

iona

l so

vere

ignt

y do

es n

ot p

recl

ude

Fra

nce,

20

See

supr

a no

te 1

8.

21

See

sup

ra n

ote

13.

22

Dec

isio

n N

o. 9

2-3

12, S

ep\.

2,

J 992

, C

C R

ep.

76;

in E

ngli

sh:

CC

, C

onst

itut

iona

l C

ase

La

w

il.

3),

at 5

5; s

ee a

l.w

CO

IOm

cnts

by

L. F

:lvo

reu,

R.f

W.C

. 1

99

2.4

08

and

R.G

.D.l

.P.

1993

.39;

B.

enev

ois,

R.F

D.A

. J 9

92.9

37;

F. L

uth

aire

, R.

D.P

. J 9

92.1

587

; B

. M

athi

eu a

nd

M.

Ver

peau

x, P

A.

ee.

9,

J 993

, at

J3

Hnd

N.

Van

Tuo

ng,

J.C

P.

1992

.1J.

J 94

3.

23

See

Ala

in P

elle

t, L

es fo

ndem

ents

juri

diqu

es i

nter

nati

onau

x du

dro

it c

omm

unau

tair

e, i

n V

­EU

RO

PEA

N L

AW

AC

AD

EM

Y,

FLO

RE

NC

E,

RE

CU

EIL

DE

S C

OU

RS

19

3-2

71

, es

peci

ally

at

22

5-2

31

99

7).

24

Sai

d pr

ovis

ions

are

: 1.

Pre

amhl

e to

the

195

8 C

on

stit

uti

on

ref

erri

ng

to

the

Dec

lara

tio

n o

f u

man

and

Civ

ic R

ight

s o

f 17

89 a

nd t

he P

ream

ble

to t

he C

onst

itut

ion

of

1946

(se

e su

pra,

par

a.

1; 2.

par

a. 3

of

the

J 78

9 D

ecla

rati

on

: "A

lI [

?] s

ov

erei

gn

ty i

nh

eres

in

the

Nat

ion

"; 3

. ar

t. 3

of

A F

renc

h P

ersp

ecti

ve o

n T

reat

y Im

plem

enta

tion

acti

ng i

n ac

cord

ance

wit

h t

he P

ream

ble

to t

he C

onst

itut

ion

of

1946

, fr

om c

oncl

udin

g in

tern

atio

nal

agre

emen

ts i

n vi

ew o

f it

s pa

rtic

ipat

ion

in t

he e

stab

lish

men

t or

deve

lopm

ent

of a

per

man

ent

inte

rnat

iona

l or

ga­

niza

tion

enj

oyin

g le

gal p

erso

nali

ty a

nd d

ecis

ion-

mak

ing

pow

ers

on t

he

basi

s o

f tra

nsfe

rs o

fpow

ers

deci

ded

on b

y th

e M

embe

r S

tate

s, s

ubje

ct

to r

ecip

roci

ty.2

5

285

Suc

b a

form

ula

("tr

ansf

ers

of p

ower

s")

is,

inde

ed m

ore

conv

inci

ng t

han

the

text

of t

he P

ream

ble

to t

he 1

946

Con

stit

utio

n it

self

("li

mit

atio

ns o

f sov

erei

gnty

"26)

ev

en t

houg

h it

mig

ht s

eem

rat

her

para

doxi

cal

that

the

Con

seil

con

stit

utio

nnel

re­

wri

tes

the

wor

ding

of

the

Con

stit

utio

n it

is

supp

osed

to a

pply

. T

his

new

for

mul

a­ti

on w

as,

how

ever

, in

trod

uced

int

o th

e C

onst

itut

ion

by a

n am

endm

ent

adop

ted

foll

owin

g th

is d

ecis

ion.

The

new

Art

icle

88-

2 st

ates

:

Sub

ject

to

reci

proc

ity[

27]

and

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith

the

term

s o

f th

e T

reat

y o

n E

urop

ean

Uni

on s

igne

d on

Feb

ruar

y 19

92, F

ranc

e ag

rees

to

the

tran

sfer

of p

ower

s ne

cess

ary

to t

he e

stab

lish

men

t o

f Eur

opea

n ec

o­no

mic

and

mon

etar

y un

ion

and

for

the

dete

rmin

atio

n o

f rul

es r

elat

ing

to t

he c

ross

ing

of

the

exte

rnal

bor

ders

of

the

mem

bers

Sta

tes

of

the

Eur

opea

n C

omm

unit

y."2

8

Art

icle

88

-1,

also

ad

ded

to

the

Con

stit

utio

n af

ter

Maa

stri

cht

l by

C

onst

itut

iona

l L

aw o

f Jun

e 25

, 19

92, i

s dr

afte

d al

ong

the

sam

e li

nes.

It

defi

nes

the

Eur

opea

n C

omm

unit

ies

and

the

Eur

opea

n U

nion

as

"con

sist

ing

of

Sta

tes,

whi

ch,

the

Co

nst

itu

tio

n o

f 19

58 (

see

supr

a n

ote

17)

; 4.

par

a. 1

4 o

f th

e P

ream

hle

to

the

Co

nst

itu

tio

n

of

1958

(se

e su

pra

no

te 3

); 5

. pa

ra.

15 o

f th

is s

ame

Pre

amh

le (

see

id.)

an

d 6

. A

rt.

53 o

f th

e 19

58 C

on

stit

uti

on

: ac

cord

ing

to

whi

ch "

trea

ties

an

d a

gre

emen

ts r

elat

ing

to

inte

rnat

ion

al o

rga­

niz

atio

n .

' .

may

on

ly h

e ra

tifi

ed o

r ap

prov

ed i

n p

urs

uan

ce o

f an

aet

of

Par

liam

ent"

(se

e al

so

supr

a n

ote

6).

25

D

ecis

ion

of A

pr.

9, 1

992,

sup

ra n

ote

13 [

emph

asis

add

ed].

In

its

Dec

isio

n o

f Ja

n. 2

2, 1

999,

re

gard

ing

the

Sta

tute

of

the

I.C

.C.

(sup

ra n

ote

1),

the

Con

seil

con

stit

utio

nnel

set

as i

de t

his

con­

dit

ion

of

reci

proc

ity.

It

righ

tly

note

s th

at,

in c

on

sid

erat

ion

of

its

pu

rpo

se,

that

is,

"to

pro

mo

te

wor

ld p

eace

and

sec

urit

y an

d to

sec

ure

resp

ect

for

gene

ral

prin

cipl

es o

f int

erna

tion

al p

ubli

c la

w,"

"o

bli

gat

ion

s p

roce

edin

g f

rom

suc

h co

mm

itm

ents

are

im

pose

d on

eac

h S

tate

Par

ty i

ndep

ende

ntly

o

f th

e w

ay t

hey

are

imp

lem

ente

d b

y o

ther

Sta

tes

Par

ties

; th

eref

ore,

the

res

erva

tion

co

nce

rnin

g

reci

proc

ity

men

tio

ned

in

art.

55

of

the

Con

stit

utio

n is

no

t to

he

app

lied

" (m

y tr

ansl

atio

n).

See

text

of

art.

55,

sup

ra.

26

See

supr

a no

te 3

. 27

O

n th

is u

nn

eces

sary

men

tion

, se

e su

pra

note

25.

28

E

mph

asis

ad

ded

. On

Jan

. 18

, 19

99,

the

Con

gres

s (m

ade

of

the

two

Hou

ses

ofP

arli

amen

t m

eeti

ng

to

geth

er-

see s

upra

) ad

op

ted

a n

ew c

onst

itut

iona

l am

endm

ent,

ad

din

g a

sec

ond

para

­gr

aph

to a

rt.

88

-2 a

ccor

ding

to w

hich

, "U

nd

er th

e se

sam

e re

serv

atio

n an

d ac

cord

ing

to t

he m

odal

­il

ies

prov

ided

for

in

the

Tre

aty

inst

itut

ing

the

Eur

opea

n C

omm

unit

y, i

n it

s dr

afti

ng r

esul

ting

fro

m

the

Tre

aty

sig

ned

on

Oct

. 2,

199

7, t

rans

fers

of p

ow

ers

nec

essa

ry t

o th

e d

eter

min

atio

n o

f ru

les

rela

ting

to

the

free

mov

emen

t o

f pe

rson

s an

d re

late

d m

atte

rs m

ay b

e ag

reed

up

on

"; m

y tr

ansl

a­ti

on

, em

ph

asis

ad

ded

. T

his

am

end

men

t w

as a

do

pte

d i

n co

mp

lian

ce w

ith

the

Dec

isio

n o

f th

e C

onst

itut

iona

l C

ounc

il o

n th

e T

reat

y o

f Am

ster

dam

, su

pra

note

14.

Page 6

,""o

u

uel

ega

cmg

:ic

ate

l'ow

ers

by m

eans

of t

he c

onst

itut

ive

trea

ties

, ha

ve v

olun

tari

ly r

esol

ved

to e

xerc

ise

som

e o

f th

eir

pow

ers

in c

omm

on."

29

Thi

s ne

w f

orm

ulat

ion,

rei

tera

ted

in t

he C

ounc

il's

dec

isio

ns c

once

rnin

g A

mst

erda

m30

and

the

Sta

tute

of t

he 1

.C.C

.,31

is f

ar m

ore

sati

sfac

tory

tha

n fo

rmu­

las

used

in

prev

ious

dec

isio

ns.

In i

ts D

ecis

ion

of D

ecem

ber

30,

1976

, on

the

Ele

ctio

n o

f the

Ass

embl

y o

f the

C

omm

unit

ies

by u

nive

rsal

dir

ect s

uffr

age,

the

Con

stit

utio

nal

Cou

ncil

had

ass

erte

d th

at

notw

iths

tand

ing

the

wor

ding

of

the

1946

Pre

ambl

e,32

whi

ch i

t qu

oted

, , n

pr

ovis

ion

of a

con

stit

utio

nal n

atur

e au

thor

izes

tra

n~fe

rs o

f sov

erei

gnty

as

a w

hole

or

in

part

to

any

int

erna

tion

al o

rgan

izat

ion

wha

tsoe

ver."

33 f

t ag

ain

llsed

the

ex

pres

sion

"tr

ansf

er o

f so

vere

ignt

y" i

n its

Dec

isio

n o

f Ju

ly 2

5, 1

991,

rel

atin

g to

th

e A

gree

men

t fo

r th

e E

nfor

cem

ent

of

the

chen

gen

Con

vent

ion

of

1985

. B

ut,

show

ing

ambi

vale

nce

it pu

t th

ese

wor

ds i

n qu

otat

ion

mar

ks a

ltbo

ugh,

in th

e sa

me

deci

sion

, it

nlso

ref

erre

d to

all

eged

' ab

ando

rune

nt o

f s v

erei

gnty

," e

ven

lhou

gh

deny

i.ng

rbat

suc

h an

aba

ndor

unen

t was

im

plie

d by

the

Con

vent

ion.

34

By

mov

ing

from

the

con

cept

of "

lim

itat

ion,

" "t

rans

fer"

or

"aba

ndon

men

t of

sove

reig

nty"

to

fuat

of "

tran

sfer

s o

f pow

ers,

" th

e C

ounc

i.l h

as n

uanc

ed it

s ju

risp

m­

denc

e in

a m

Osl

sen

sib

l.e d

iTec

tion.

It D

OW

tak

es i

nto

acco

unt t

he r

eal

mea

ning

of

sove

reig

nty

in m

odem

int

erna

tion

al l

aw w

hile

avo

idin

g th

e im

pres

sion

tha

t so

v­er

eign

ty c

an b

e tr

ansf

erre

d (o

r Ii

nlite

d, o

r "d

eleg

ated

") in

par

t or

in w

hole

by

...

a so

vere

ign

Sta

te,

whi

ch,

to r

eite

rate

my

view

wou

ld m

ean

Ihai

the

tra

nsfe

rrin

g po

wel

· ha

s ce

ased

to

be a

Sta

te.

Thi

s ap

proa

ch,

whi

ch f

its w

ith

sove

reig

nty

in i

ts i

nter

nati

onal

def

initi

on,

has

to b

e re

conc

iled

wit

h th

e m

eani

ng o

f the

wor

d in

Fre

nch

dom

esti

c la

w a

s em

bod­

ied

in A

rtic

le 3

of t

he C

onst

itut

ion.

35 H

ere

the

noti

on o

f "es

sent

ial

cond

itio

ns f

or

the

exer

cise

of

nati

onal

sov

erei

gnty

" pr

oves

hel

pful

. A

s no

ted

abov

e,36

the

on

stit

utio

nal C

OU1~

cil

coin

ed t

his

expr

essi

on a

s ea

rly

as 1

970

, an

d re

fers

ta

it in

ord

er t

o ap

prai

se w

heth

er a

tre

aty

"jeo

pard

izes

th

e so

vere

ignt

y o

f the

peo

ple

wbi

ch,

cons

titut

iona

lly,

has

to b

ex

erci

sed

"by

tbei

!" r

ep­

rese

ntat

ives

[th

at is

the

Mem

bers

ofP

arli

amen

t and

, pr

obab

ly,

the

Pre

side

nt o

f the

R

epub

lic]

and

by

the

way

of r

efer

endu

m."

T

he p

robl

em r

aise

d by

thi

s co

ncep

t (a

nd p

roba

bly

its

valu

e) l

ies

in i

ts

hazi

ness

and

sub

ject

ivit

y, a

Il th

e m

ore

beca

use

now

here

doe

s th

e C

onst

itut

ion

29

Em

phas

is a

dded

. JO

D

ecis

ion

ofD

ec.

31

,199

7, s

upra

not

e 14

. JI

D

ecis

ion

of

Jan

. 22,

199

9, s

upra

not

e 1.

J2

S

ee s

upra

p.

279

. JJ

D

ecis

ion

No.

76-

71,

my

tran

slat

ion,

em

phas

is a

ddcd

. Se

e a/

so c

omm

ents

by

J. B

oulo

uis,

C

ah.

DI.

eur

o 19

77.4

58;

J. D

arra

s an

d O

. P

irot

ie

R.I

.D.E

. 19

77.6

97;

L.

Fav

oreu

and

L.

Phi

lip,

R

.D.P

. 19

77.1

29;

C.

Fra

nck,

J.C

P.

1977

.11.

1870

4; R

. K

ovar

and

D.

Sim

on,

R.T

.D.E

. 19

77.6

97;

L. H

amon

, D

. 19

77.2

01;

D.

Ruz

ié, J

.O.l

. 1

97

7.6

6 a

nd

M.

de V

illie

rs, JC

P.

1978

.1.2

895

. J4

D

ecis

ion

No

. 91

-29

4, C

C R

ep.9

1. S

ee a

/so

com

men

ts b

y P.

Gai

a, R

.FD

.C.

1991

.703

and

R

.R.J

-Oro

il p

rosp

ecti

f, 1

992,

No

. l,

p.

25;

L. H

amon

, O.

1991

.617

; F.

Luc

hair

e, R

.D.P

. 19

91.1

499;

X

. Pré

tot,

R.T

.D.E

. 19

92.1

87 a

nd G

. Ved

el,

R.F

D.A

. 19

92.1

73.

J5

See

sup

ra n

ote

17.

J6

See

tex

t ac

com

pany

ing

note

12.

A F

renc

h P

ersp

ecti

ve o

n T

reat

y Im

plem

enta

tion

28

7

mak

e a

dist

inct

ion

betw

een

the

esse

ntia

l an

d th

e no

n-es

sent

ial

cond

itio

ns o

f so

vere

ignt

y.37

O

n so

rne

occa

sion

s ho

wev

er,

the

Con

stit

utio

nal

Cou

nci1

has

att

empt

ed t

o cl

arifY

the

cri

teri

ons

for

the

notio

n. T

hus,

in

its D

ecis

ion

of

1970

, it

held

.t~a

t "t

he

repl

acem

ent o

f the

fin

anci

al c

ontr

ibut

ions

of M

embe

r St

ate.

s by

C~rnmumtles o~n

reso

urce

s ca

n, n

eith

er b

y ils

nat

ure

nor

by if

s im

port

ance

, jeO

pard

lze

the

esse

ntla

l co

ndit

ions

for

the

exe

rcis

e o

f nat

iona

l so

vere

ignt

y."3

8 In

198

5, i

t gav

e a

list o

f sor

ne

elem

ents

whi

ch c

ould

be

of s

uch

"nat

ure"

or

"im

port

ance

" bu

t co

nclu

ded

that

:

Add

itio

nal

Pro

toco

l N

o.

6 to

th

e E

urop

ean

Con

vent

ion

for

the

Pro

tect

ion

of H

urna

n R

ight

s an

d F

unda

men

tal F

reed

oms

rela

ting

to t

he

abol

itio

n o

f the

dea

th p

enal

ty, w

hich

is n

ot in

com

pati

ble

wit

h th

e du

ty

incu

mbe

nt o

n th

e S

tate

to

sec u

re r

espe

ct f

or t

he i

nsti

tuti

ons

of

the

Rep

ubli

c, c

onti

nuit

y o

f th

e li

fe o

f th

e N

atio

n an

d pr

otec

tion

of

the

righ

ts a

nd f

reed

oms

of t

he c

itiz

ens,

the

refo

re d

oes

not j

eopa

rdiz

e th

e es

sent

ial

cond

itio

ns f

or t

he e

xerc

ise

of n

atio

nal

sove

reig

nty.

39

The

Cou

ncil

rep

rodu

ced

this

sam

e li

st i

n its

Dec

isio

n o

f Ju

ly 2

5, 1

991,

and

co

nclu

ded,

on

this

bas

is a

nd a

fter

a m

etic

ulou

s an

alys

is,

that

the

Agr

eem

ent

for

the

App

lica

tion

of

the

Sch

enge

n C

onve

ntio

n o

f 19

85 w

as i

n co

nfor

mit

y w

ith

the

Con

stit

utio

n.40

H

owev

er, w

ith

Maa

stri

cht l

, the

Cou

ncil

res

urne

d a

mor

e em

piri

cal

appr

oach

an

d as

sess

ed v

ery

subj

ecti

vely

the

tm

eats

to

the

"ess

enti

al c

ondi

tion

s o

f the

exe

r­ci

se o

f na

tion

al s

over

eign

ty,"

whi

ch i

t as

sert

s m

ore

than

it

prov

es b

y us

ing

the

"im

port

ance

" an

d "n

atur

e" t

ests

. T

he D

ecis

ions

in

Am

ster

dam

and

the

Sta

tute

of

the

LC

.C. a

re a

long

the

sam

e hn

es b

ut a

new

em

phas

is i

s gi

ven

to t

he "

fiel

d" o

f th

e tr

eaty

or

the

"con

diti

ons"

of i

ts e

nfor

cem

ent.

41

App

lyin

g th

ese

prin

cipl

es,

the

foll

owin

g tr

eati

es h

ave be

~n d~clared

not

to

be c

ontr

ary

to t

he c

once

pt o

f na

tion

al s

over

eign

ty a

s em

bodl

ed 1

0 t

he F

renc

h C

onst

itut

ion:

J7

Thi

s pu

rely

pra

etor

ian

orig

in o

f th

e no

tion

is

mad

e cl

ear

by t

he w

ordi

ng o

f th

e re

leva

nt

deci

sion

s o

f th

e C

onst

itut

iona

l C

ounc

il,

whi

ch p

reci

ses

that

the

aut

honz

atlo

n to

rat

lfy

trea

tles

re

quir

es p

rior

am

endm

ent

of

the

Con

stit

utio

n w

here

the

y "c

onta

in a

cla

use

that

is c

ontr

ary

to

the

Con

stit

utio

n,

or

whe

re t

hey

jeop

ardi

ze t

he e

ssen

tial

con

diti

ons

for

the

exer

clse

of

natI

Ona

l so

vere

ignt

y" [

emph

asis

add

ed]

(see

, e

g.,

Maa

stri

cht

l, s

upra

not

e 13

; Am

ster

dam~

s~f.ra

note

14

, S

tatu

te o

f th

e I.

C.C

., su

pra

note

I-i

n t

his

last

cas

e, t

he C

ounc

d ad

ds t

o th

e h

st .

m~~rna­

tion

al c

om

mit

men

ts w

hich

jeo

par

diz

e ri

ghts

and

fre

edom

s se

cure

d by

the

Con

stit

utIO

n ;

my

tran

slat

ion)

. )8

Se

e SI

/pra

not

e 12

; em

phas

is a

dded

. J9

D

ecis

ion

No.

85-

188,

May

22,

198

5, C

C R

ep.1

5; s

ee a

/so

com

men

ts b

y L

. Fa

vore

u, A

.FD

.l.

1985

.868

and

A./

.J.C

. 19

85.4

30.

40

See

sup

ra n

ote

34.

41

See

supr

a no

tes

14 a

nd 1

.

Page 7

288

Del

ega

tin

g S

tate

Pow

ers

Dec

isio

n o

f the

Cou

ncil

of t

he C

omm

unit

ies

of A

pril

21,

197

0, r

elat

ing

to

the

repl

acem

ent

of

the

fina

ncia

l co

ntri

buti

ons

of

Mem

ber

Sta

tes

by

Com

mun

itie

s ow

n re

sour

ces

(con

trar

y ne

ithe

r by

its

nat

ure

nor

its i

mpo

r­ta

nce

to t

he "

esse

ntia

l co

ndit

ions

of t

he e

xerc

ise

of n

atio

nal

sove

reig

nty"

);42

Tre

aty

of

Lux

embo

urg

of A

pril

22,

197

0, m

odif

ying

sor

ne b

udge

tary

rul

es

in t

he T

reat

ies

inst

itut

ing

the

Eur

opea

n C

omm

unit

ies

(whi

ch d

oes

not

chan

ge t

he b

alan

ce b

etw

een

the

Com

mun

itie

s on

the

one

han

d, a

nd i

ts

Mem

ber

Sta

tes

on t

he o

ther

han

d);4

3

Fra

nco-

Ger

man

add

itio

nal A

gree

men

t ofO

ctob

er 2

4, 1

974,

to t

he E

urop

ean

Con

vent

ion

on j

udic

ial

coop

erat

ion

of

1959

(w

hich

pre

serv

es t

he j

uris

dic­

tion

of t

he F

renc

hjud

icia

l au

thor

itie

s to

im

plem

ent i

n Fr

ance

the

obli

gati

on

of j

udic

ial

coop

erat

ion

it im

pose

s an

d do

es n

ot i

nfri

nge

the

cons

titu

tion

al

righ

t o

f as

ylum

);44

Agr

eem

ent

of

Sep

tem

ber

20,

1976

, in

stit

utin

g di

rect

uni

vers

al s

uffr

age

for

the

elec

tion

of t

he E

urop

ean

Par

liam

enta

ry A

ssem

bly

(whi

ch d

o es

not

"cr

e­at

e a

sove

reig

nty"

(si

c) a

nd d

oes

not

infr

inge

the

pow

ers

and

func

tion

s o

f th

e in

stit

utio

ns o

f th

e R

epub

lic,

nor

the

pri

ncip

le o

f in

divi

sibi

lity

of

the

Rep

ubli

c );4

5

"Kin

gsto

n A

gree

men

ts"

of J

anua

ry 8

, 19

76,

amen

ding

the

Sta

tute

s o

f the

In

tern

atio

nal

Mon

etar

y F

und

(whi

ch e

nter

ed i

n fo

rce

in c

onfo

rmit

y w

ith

the

proc

eedi

ngs

prov

ided

for

in

said

Sta

tute

s al

read

y ra

tifi

ed b

y F

ranc

e an

d w

hich

, in

an

y ca

se,

leav

e M

embe

rs

Sta

tes

free

to

de

fine

th

eir

exch

ange

par

ity);

46

Add

itio

nal

Pro

toco

l N

o. 6

to t

he E

urop

ean

Con

vent

ion

on H

uman

Rig

hts

of

1950

on

the

abol

itio

n o

f the

dea

th p

enal

ty o

f Apr

il 28

, 19

83,

(whi

ch "

is n

ot

inco

mpa

tibl

e w

ith

the

dut y

inc

umbe

nt o

n th

e S

tate

to s

ecur

e re

spec

t for

the

inst

itut

ions

of t

he R

epub

lic,

con

tinu

ity

of t

he l

ife

of t

he N

atio

n an

d pr

otec

­ti

on o

f the

rig

hts

and

free

dom

s o

f the

citi

zens

");4

7

Agr

eem

ent

for

the

App

lica

tion

of

the

Sch

enge

n C

onve

ntio

n o

f Ju

ne 1

4,

1985

(w

hich

doe

s no

t in

frin

ge t

he

com

pete

nce

of

the

poli

ce i

n ea

ch

Eur

opea

n S

tate

, au

thor

izes

the

Par

ties

to

gran

t as

ylum

acc

ordi

ng t

o th

eir

own

dom

esti

c la

ws

and

prov

ides

for

cro

ss-b

orde

r in

vest

igat

ions

and

pur

suit

s on

ly i

n ur

gent

or

exce

ptio

nal

circ

umst

ance

s).4

8

42

CC

, D

ecis

ion

of

June

19,

197

0, s

ee s

upra

not

e 12

. 4

] Id

. 44

C

C,

Dec

isio

n N

o. 8

0-1

16

of J

uly

17,

1980

, C

C R

ep.3

6; s

ee a

/so

com

men

ts b

y L

. F

avor

eu,

R D

P.

1980

.164

0 an

d C

h. V

allé

e, R

.G.D

.l.P

. 19

81.2

02.

45

CC

, D

ecis

ion

of

Dec

. 30

, 19

76,

see

supr

a no

te 3

3.

46

CC

, D

ecis

ion

No.

78

-93

of A

pr.

29

,19

78

, C

C R

ep.2

3; s

ee a

/so

com

men

ts b

y D

. C

arre

au,

R.G

.D.l

.P.

1979

.209

; H

amon

, D

. 19

79.5

42 a

nd D

. R

uzié

, iD

.!.

1978

.577

. 47

C

C,

Dec

isio

n o

f M

ay 2

2,

1985

, see

sup

ra n

ote

39.

48

CC

, D

ecis

ion

of

July

25,

199

1, s

ee s

upra

not

e 34

. B

y a

Dec

isio

n N

o. 9

8-3

99

of

May

5,

1998

, th

e C

onst

itut

iona

l C

ounc

il d

ecid

ed,

abou

t th

e A

ct i

n P

arli

amen

t (n

ot a

tre

aty)

con

cern

ing

entr

y an

d re

side

nce

in F

ranc

e o

f al

iens

and

the

rig

ht o

f as

ylum

, th

at "

the

pres

ence

of

repr

esen

-

A F

renc

h P

ersp

ecti

ve o

n T

reat

y Im

plem

enta

tion

28

9

By

con

tras

t, t

he f

ollo

win

g tr

eati

es h

ave

bee

n d

ecla

red

in p

art u

ncon

stit

utio

nal:

Tre

aty

of

Maa

stri

cht

for

Eur

opea

n U

nion

of

Feb

ruar

y 7,

19

92,

sinc

e,

thro

ugh

the

righ

t to

vote

in

mun

icip

al e

lect

ions

gra

nted

to

"Eur

opea

n ci

ti­

zens

" to

mun

icip

al e

lect

ions

, it p

erm

its

fore

igne

rs t

o pa

rtic

ipat

e in

the

ele

c­ti

ons

of

the

Sen

ator

s; b

y cr

eati

ng a

sin

gle

mon

etar

y an

d ex

chan

ge p

olic

y it

bear

s on

• a

mat

ter

wbi

ch i

5 vi

tal

to t

he e

xerc

ise

of

nati

onal

sov

erei

gnty

";

and

by p

rovi

ding

for

the

ado

ptio

n by

a m

ajor

ily

vote

of a

pol

icy

conc

erni

ng

the

gran

ting

ofv

isas

'it

coul

d ge

nera

te a

situ

atio

n in

whi

ch t

he e

xerc

ise

of

nati

onal

sov

erei

gnty

was

[w

ould

be]

jeo

pard

ized

";49

Tre

aty

of A

mst

erda

m o

f Oct

ober

2,

1997

, am

endi

ng th

e T

reat

y on

Eur

opea

n U

nion

and

the

Tre

atie

s es

tabl

ishi

ng th

e E

urop

ean

Com

mun

itie

s, i

n th

at t

he

tran

sfer

of p

ower

s au

thor

ized

by

this

ins

trum

ent

in a

re as

suc

h as

the

abo

li­

tion

of

cont

raIs

of

pers

ons

cros

sing

int

erna

i or

ext

erna

l bo

rder

s, a

sylu

m,

imm

igra

tion

or

the

gran

ting

of v

isas

cou

ld a

ffec

t the

con

diti

ons

esse

ntia

l fo

r th

e ex

erci

se o

f nat

iona

l so

vere

ignt

y;50

and

Sta

tute

of t

he I

.C.C

. si

gned

at

Rom

e on

Jul

y 17

, 19

98.51

A s

yn

thes

is o

f th

is j

uri

spru

den

ce i

s d

iffi

cult

, p

arti

y b

ecau

se t

he

case

Jaw

re

mai

ns l

imit

ed e

ven

ifit

is g

row

ing

rath

er r

apid

ly;

part

iy b

ecau

se,

in c

on

form

ity

w

ith

the

Fre

nch

jud

icia

l tr

adit

ion.

th

e C

OU

llcil

doe

s no

t el

abor

ate

the

reas

ons

for

its

deci

sion

s.

Sor

ne o

f it

s m

ain

ele

men

ts c

an b

e su

mm

ed u

p as

fol

low

s:

(1)

the

adop

tion

by

a m

ajor

ity

vote

of

deci

sion

s bi

ndin

g o

n M

emb

ers

Sta

tes

of

an i

nter

nati

onal

org

aniz

atio

n in

"im

po

rtan

t" m

atte

rs;

(2)

the

poss

ibil

ity

for

exte

rnal

aut

hori

ties

to

inve

stig

ate

on

the

Fre

nch

terr

i­to

ry;

or

(3)

gran

ting

to

fore

igne

rs a

rig

ht to

vot

e in

nat

iona

l el

ecti

ons

jeo

par

diz

e th

e es

sent

ial

cond

itio

ns f

or t

he e

xerc

ise

of

nati

onal

sov

erei

gnty

.

t01.

ives

of

the

OIT

ice

of t

he U

nite

d N

atio

ns H

igh

Com

mis

sion

cr f

or R

I:fug

cC5,

aec

oUD

tmg

for

one

thir

d o

f ca

ch o

f th

e se

clio

ns o

f the

ref

ugec

s A

ppea

l C

omm

issi

on .

..• b

emg

a m

inor

ity

pres

ence

, do

es n

ot J

eopa

rdiz

e th

e cs

sent

ial

cond

üion

s fo

r fh

e ex

erci

se o

f na

tion

al s

over

cign

ty";

Eng

lish

te

xl

in

C,

Co

m·ti

ll//;

Qlla

l Cas

e L

aw

(fn.

3),

al 1

37;

see

alsl

) co

mm

cnts

by

N.

Gui

mcz

anes

, J.C

.P.

1998

.1.1

80;

. Ju

lien

-Laf

crri

ère,

AJ.

D.A

. 19

98.1

001

: A.

Penn

-Gai

a, R

.F.D

.C.

1998

.634

; lE

. E

. Pl

carù

, R

.F.D

.A.

1998

.620

; S

choe

ttl,

A.J

.D.A

. 19

98.4

89;_

C. T

eitg

cn-

Col

ly,

id.I

OO

I: D

. Tur

pin,

N

.C.D

.I.P

. 19

9R.5

2J.

49

C,

Dec

isio

n o

f A

pr.

9,

L99

2,

see

sup

ra n

ote

13.

By

ils

Dec

isio

n o

f S

ept.

2,

1992

, (M

aast

rich

t Il

, SI/p

ro n

oIe

22),

the

Con

stit

utio

nal

Cou

ncil

too

k th

e vi

ew t

hat

the

Tre

aty

of M

aast

rich

t w

as i

n co

nfon

nity

wit

h th

e C

ons

titu

tion

as

amen

ded

by t

he C

onst

itut

iona

l A

ct o

f Ju

ne 2

5, 1

992

adop

te<l

afte

r ils

Dce

i~io

ll r

n M

aast

rich

t 1.

50

CC

, D

ecis

ion

of

Dec

. 31

, 19

97,

see

supr

a no

te 1

4.

51

See

sup

ra n

ote

1.