Ministerial responsibility is traditionally framed in collective terms, so that individual political accountability is often viewed as suspect or historically discredited. Yet the experience of the Third and Fourth French Republics suggests that the failure of individual responsibility was due less to any flaw in the principle itself than to deficient institutional design. A comparative examination of the British, Swedish and Italian systems shows that collective and individual forms of responsi
De son adoption le 8 juillet 2025 à sa mise à l’épreuve du contrôle de constitutionnalité, la loi Duplomb restera associée dans l’histoire de la Vème République au moment où le Parlement a momentanément perdu sa prérogative de voter la loi, contrairement aux dispositions de l’article 24 de la Constitution. Malgré la validation de cette nouvelle méthode de fabrication des lois par le Conseil constitutionnel, l’adoption d’une motion de rejet préalable en vue d’éviter les débats à l’Assemblée nationale mérite d’être discutée en raison de ses effets délétères sur la démocratie délibérative. À ce titre, le principe de clarté et de sincérité des débats parlementaires est peut-être l’une des solutions à la crise de la délibération législative. L’absence d’effectivité de ce principe suppose de chercher à renforcer sa portée à travers un principe venu d’ailleurs, le principe de l’estoppel.
From its adoption on July 8, 2025, to its scrutiny under constitutional review, the Duplomb Law will remain marked in the history of the Fifth Republic as the moment when Parliament temporarily lost its prerogative to pass legislation, in contravention of Article 24 of the Constitution. Although the Conseil constitutionnel upheld this new method of lawmaking, the use of a motion for prior rejection to avoid debates in the National Assembly warrants discussion, given its harmful impact on deliberative democracy. In this context, the principle of clarity and sincerity in parliamentary debates may offer a potential remedy to the crisis in legislative deliberation. However, the current lack of effectiveness of this principle suggests the need to reinforce it by drawing on a concept from elsewhere: the principle of estoppel.
Pour citer cet article :
Rym Fassi-Fihri« Ministerial responsibility is traditionally framed in collective terms, so that individual political accountability is often viewed as suspect or historically discredited. Yet the experience of the Third and Fourth French Republics suggests that the failure of individual responsibility was due less to any flaw in the principle itself than to deficient institutional design. A comparative examination of the British, Swedish and Italian systems shows that collective and individual forms of responsi », Jus Politicum, n°34 [https://juspoliticum.com/articles/]