A third chamber for ongoing citizen participation
France’s reforms to bring everyday citizens into the functioning of the Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE)
Interview with Éric Buge, Fellow of the Institut Michel Villey-Paris 2 University
The French Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE) is the ‘third chamber’ in the French system, representing organised civil society. It has recently been reformed to broaden it into a civil society and citizens’ chamber. Why is now the time to introduce a more permanent role for citizens in decision making?
At the beginning of his term, President Macron expressed the wish to reform the CESE to make it a chamber of citizen participation and to better include citizens in the law-making process. A constitutional reform was initiated for this purpose in 2018, but was later abandoned.
However, the Yellow Vests movement led the executive to initiate the Great National Debate (grand débat national), a large-scale consultation that took place from January-March 2019. In his press conference concluding the Great Debate, the President announced the establishment of the Citizens’ Convention on Climate, composed of citizens selected via civic lottery, hosted by the CESE. The latter delivered its conclusions in June 2020, and the reform of the CESE can be seen as a way of allowing such citizens’ conventions to be held again in the future.
Nevertheless, the reform took the form of an organic law and was therefore not as comprehensive as a constitutional reform.
What is the current role of the Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE) in France, and how does it function? Who is part of it?
The CESE is the assembly of organised civil society. Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE) is a constitutional consultative body composed of 175 members representing trade unions, companies, associations and environmental organisations. It has three main missions: to advise the government and the parliament on bills and draft statutory instruments; to elaborate reports about economic, social and (since 2008 constitutional reform) environmental issues; and to receive petitions.
What changes have been introduced to the CESE in 2021?
The January 2021 organic law reform reduced its number of members from 233 to 175, and strengthened the mechanisms for public involvement in its functioning in three ways.
1. First, it has made it easier for people to submit petitions. The signature threshold was lowered from 500,000 to 150,000. Petitions can now be collected electronically.
2. Second, the CESE is now able to organise public consultations, either on its own initiative or at the request of the government or either chamber of parliament. In this context, it will be able to select citizens by lot who will take part in the consultation. This is the first time that a law specifies the use of sortition for consultations.
3. Finally, the CESE can now involve citizens in its committees. Hybrid working groups can be formed from time to time, comprising both members of organised civil society and citizens selected by lot.
To what extent is there support for this reform from the members of the CESE, members of other French democratic institutions, and society at large?
It is rather uncommon for an institution to agree to reduce its number of members, or undergo a profound change. However, in this case, the reform was actually promoted by the CESE itself.
The reform bill was approved by the National Assembly but rejected by the Senate, which is strongly opposed to the use of civic lottery to select citizens. It considers that only elections can confer democratic legitimacy.
In the opposite direction, many civic organisations and NGOs were in favour of an even more ambitious reform with guarantees independence and transparency in the organisation of citizens’ conventions. They were disappointed by the law and are now calling for a new convention to be held on the subject of “democratic renewal”.
Does this reform improve citizens’ opportunities to influence decision making?
The CESE reform does not really allow citizens to participate in decision making directly. Decisions remain in the hands of existing institutions, namely the parliament and the government. Indeed, the CESE is not a decision-making body; it only formulates opinions. The reform will enable citizens to bring matters before the CESE by means of a petition, and for public authorities to call for citizens’ conventions on subjects of their choice.
The reform enables public authorities to have a channel for soliciting citizens’ views, in particular via random selection, which previously did not exist. It would have been possible to link both the petition and the citizens’ convention mechanisms, by, for instance, allowing citizens to petition to initiate a citizens’ convention, but such options were not considered.
Could the reform open the door towards further institutionalisation of randomly selected citizen deliberation in France?
What the experience of the Citizens’ Climate Convention has shown is that it is complicated to combine classic representative institutions and meaningful citizen participation. President Macron had promised to send the Convention’s proposals to Parliament “unfiltered”, i.e. to take them on board. This was a way of giving the Citizens’ Convention a real say in the legislative process. Reality turned out to be more complex, and some proposals were not taken up. Beyond this experience, I do not think that any Constitution in the world has managed to properly articulate sortition and classical representative institutions. A lot of experimenting has recently taken place, but no one is still quite sure of the shape that this articulation may take. The reform of the CESE is a step in this direction.
This post is part of the New Democratic Institutions series. Read the other articles:
Introducing the New Democratic Institutions series
The New Democratic Institutions Participo series will take a closer look at how some of the institutionalised representative deliberative processes came about, how they function, and what lessons can be drawn from their implementation so far.
How Ostbelgien became a trailblazer in deliberative democracy
An interview with Yves Dejaeghere, one of the key people involved in designing the permanent Citizens’ Council in Ostbelgien, the German-speaking Community of Belgium.
Citizens’ Initiative Review: Helping citizens make better informed voting choices
An interview with Linn Davis, programme manager at Healthy Democracy responsible for the Citizens’ Initiative Review.
Citizens’ Councils in Vorarlberg: Building a culture of participation
Interview with Michael Lederer, Head of the Office for Future Affairs in Vorarlberg, Austria.
How can Citizens’ Assemblies open up parliament?
Interview with Pepijn Kennis, Member of the Brussels-Capital Regional Parliament and Chairperson of the Agora.Brussels parliamentary group
Building political trust for deliberative processes
Interview with Graham Allen, Convener of The Citizens’ Convention on UK Democracy, former Chair of the UK Parliamentary Select Committee on Political and Constitutional Reform, and Member of the UK Parliament 1987–2017
Deliberative Committees: When parliament and citizens work together
Interview with Magali Plovie, President of the Francophone Brussels Parliament
Democratic design for the long-term
By Graham Smith, Professor of Politics, Centre for the Study of Democracy, University of Westminster, Chair of the Foundation for Democracy and Sustainable Development, and Chair of the Knowledge Network on Climate Assemblies
