Launched by a student on July 10, the petition against the Duplomb law exceeds 1 million signatures: What can happen now?

Constitutionalist Anne-Charlène Bezzina predicted, in an interview with AFP, "a real Chinese puzzle" in which parliamentary groups, the President of the Republic, the Constitutional Council and the administrative judge will all have their part to play.

- An unprecedented debate in the Assembly?

"The possibility of online petitions dates back to 2019 and marks a sign of the Assembly's desired openness to citizen debate. This is a very concrete example of participatory democracy that could shift the boundaries.

The symbolic milestone of 500,000 signatures has been largely passed, and the Conference of Presidents of the National Assembly can therefore easily, as provided for in its rules, decide to organize a debate in the chamber.

This does not mean that the law will be re-examined in substance, but it will be a first under the Fifth Republic and, given the citizen mobilization, it will be particularly scrutinized.

On July 8, this law was adopted by a vote of 316 in favor and 223 against. Could the deputies reverse their position and consider that it should be repealed - if it has been promulgated in the meantime by the President of the Republic? Nothing could be less certain.

But if that were the case, it would give wings to opposition groups, particularly the Greens, who could at any time submit a bill including the repeal of the Duplomb law and its article on the reintroduction of the pesticide acetamiprid as an exception. Everything would then be at stake again."

- The Constitutional Council seized

"The left-wing deputies filed an appeal on July 11 before the Constitutional Council, which has one month to rule.

They are hoping for a censure, in particular because the Duplomb law was the subject of a prior motion of rejection, which prevented any real debate in the chamber.

It is very unlikely that the Sages will censure for procedural defects: they have already ruled in the past that motions of rejection, deemed "diverted" from their spirit by the opposition, were not within their jurisdiction.

In their appeal, the left-wing MPs also believe that the reintroduction of acetamiprid contravenes two constitutional principles: the precautionary principle, which requires the prevention of serious environmental damage even in cases of scientific uncertainty, and the principle of non-regression, which prohibits going back on progress in environmental protection.

But they are very general and their concrete implications are open to interpretation by the legislator.

It therefore seems unlikely that the law as a whole will be censored. On the other hand, there will undoubtedly be reservations of interpretation: the Sages will ask for assurances on certain specific points."

- Delay promulgation?

"Once the Constitutional Council stage has passed, the President of the Republic must promulgate the law. However, he can delay this promulgation and request a second deliberation in Parliament.

The Head of State, as guarantor of national cohesion, could choose this option given that in this case a significant number of citizens oppose what was voted on in Parliament."

- A non-applicable law? -

"The reintroduction of acetamiprid will require implementing decrees. The law simply provides for a review clause after a three-year period, to ensure that the conditions of use are still met.

We can clearly see that the legislator is walking on eggshells.

The implementing decrees will certainly be subject to appeals before the administrative courts. The courts may rule on the precautionary principle or decide that there is unequal treatment between farmers—for example, between those who have the right to use the pesticide and those who do not. As long as the decrees are challenged in court, the law is not applicable."