<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ http://dublincore.org/schemas/xmls/simpledc20021212.xsd">
  <dc:identifier>http://dx.doi.org/10.17176/20230327-195238-0</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://verfassungsblog.de/constitutional-perhaps-democratic-not-so-much/</dc:identifier>
  <dc:title>Constitutional? Perhaps. Democratic? Not so much - On the French Government's Maneuver to Pass the Law on Retirement</dc:title>
  <dc:creator>Bottini, Eleonora</dc:creator>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:date>2023-03-27</dc:date>
  <dc:type>electronic resource</dc:type>
  <dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
  <dc:subject>ddc:342</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Article 49.3</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>democracy</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Emmanuel Macron</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>France</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Pension Reform</dc:subject>
  <dc:publisher>Verfassungsblog</dc:publisher>
  <dc:relation>Verfassungsblog--2366-7044</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>CC BY-SA 4.0</dc:rights>
  <dc:description>The adoption of the Law on Retirement without a majority in the National Assembly has caused a huge uproar in France. The use by the executive of an article or two of the Constitution, as well as the combination thereof, is deemed constitutional until a competent organ says otherwise. And the only one who could, the Constitutional Council, will probably not say otherwise. But even if something is constitutional, that does not make it democratic. A look into the justifications given by the head of State and the head of Government stirs reflection on the relationship between the constitutional and democratic character of the proceedings.</dc:description>
</dc>
