Academic researchers have raised concerns about the "real vulnerabilities" of the French legal system in the face of the risk of an "authoritarian and reactionary majority" coming to power. In a report commissioned by environmental lawmakers and unveiled on Tuesday, September 22, they advocate for changes aimed at preventing the subordination of institutions, oppositions, and media. "Are our institutions robust enough to withstand the rise to power of an authoritarian and reactionary majority?" This question guided a collective of academics, who revealed their conclusions on Tuesday, September 22, in a study initiated by environmental lawmakers. In the document, the researchers note the "increasing challenge" to the rule of law in Europe, attributed to a "rise in authoritarianism" and "populism." The example of Hungary is highlighted, but the academics also point to situations in Greece or Slovakia. In response to this phenomenon, the collective subjected French institutions to an "authoritarian stress test" intended to measure their resilience. "Not to predict the future, but to identify our vulnerabilities in the face of a potential authoritarian shock," state deputy Léa Balage El Mariky, MEP Mélissa Camara, and senator Mélanie Vogel in the editorial introducing the study. A similar study was conducted in 2022, but the analyses have been updated and expanded in today's version. "A 'peaceful alternation of power' is almost impossible" Drawing on recent examples, the researchers imagine a typical scenario in which an "authoritarian" party comes to power by riding on public distrust, locks down French institutions, changes electoral rules, weakens oversight bodies, and organizes "biased referendums" to legitimize its actions, rendering the possibility of a "peaceful alternation of power" almost impossible. According to the researchers, such an authoritarian shift would be facilitated by several weaknesses in the French system. Their study lists many essential areas for the functioning of democracy: justice, Parliament, media, civil society, or the university. "France is the European country most vulnerable to authoritarian risk," noted Senator Mélanie Vogel on Tuesday during a presentation conference for the study. First case study: the imbalance between Parliament and the executive in the concentration of powers. According to them, the President of the Republic has powers that would allow him to "bypass" Parliament in the aim of dismantling the rule of law (misuse of referendums, exceptional powers, decrees...). Modifying the Constitution, a gamble? The researchers propose a series of constitutional modifications to address the identified vulnerabilities, a process that would inevitably take time and remain very uncertain given the composition of Parliament. "If there is political will, we can revise the Constitution in three," estimated Mélanie Vogel. "Macronists endlessly talk about the rule of law. We are waiting for a response to our proposals," emphasized deputy Léa Balage El Mariky, recalling that legislative texts have already been submitted and can be taken up by parliamentarians. Among the options considered, the academics consider it necessary to explicitly exclude the possibility of modifying the Constitution through a referendum based on Article 11 of the fundamental law - an option not used since 1969 - and also to limit the use of "rationalized parliamentarism," tools such as Article 49.3 or the blocked vote, which they say restrict the proper exercise of parliamentary functions. Guaranteeing the independence of prosecutors The authors are also concerned about the risk affecting the independence of prosecutors. "Despite positive developments, they remain dependent on the government for their careers and potential disciplinary sanctions," they note. A similar fragility exists in the administrative order, the independence of members of the Council of State relying primarily on guarantees "from practice." Although they do not endorse the current method of selecting members of the Constitutional Council, chosen by the head of state and the presidents of the National Assembly and the Senate, the academics note that it complicates the "capture" of the institution. However, they identify flaws that could influence members of the Constitutional Council. Among the collective's recommendations is the strengthening of the selection process for members of the Constitutional Council by reducing the number of votes required from parliamentarians to oppose a nomination. The academics identify several other vulnerabilities in the report, for example, considering that the public service and independent administrative authorities would be particularly exposed to "political capture." They propose, for example, to enshrine in the Constitution a list of independent administrative authorities to prevent their removal, such as the Arcom (the enforcer of audiovisual regulations), the Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection Authority, the CNIL (the data protection authority), the HATVP, or the Energy Regulation Commission. The "strong vulnerability" of the media The report devotes a section to French media, concluding that they have a "strong vulnerability," whether public or private. Researchers highlight the fragile independence of public broadcasting, illustrated by the "political appointment" of its leaders and a low representation of civil society, as well as the dependence of private media, flooded with press subsidies and threatened by an "unprecedented concentration." They recommend strengthening the role of Arcom, constitutionalizing information as a "common good," or fighting media concentration by prohibiting multiple ownership by the same entity. Among the other flaws identified by the researchers is simply the French electoral system, plagued by "structural vulnerabilities" in the face of the risk of authoritarian drift: weak constitutional protection of electoral rules, dependence of election organization on the executive, electoral boundaries easily adjustable by the ruling power, weak control of political financing... In response to this assessment, the academics propose establishing an electoral authority enshrined in the Constitution, tasked with organizing elections and managing the electoral register, and empowered to draw electoral districts. They also recommend the creation of a democracy bank to facilitate access to credit for all political formations. The report on the resilience of the French legal system against a potential authoritarian shock was written under the direction of Laurent Pech, professor of European law at the Sutherland School of Law in Dublin, and Sébastien Platon, professor of public law at the University of Bordeaux. The contributors to the study are David Biroste, a doctor in public law affiliated with the University of Aix-Marseille, Hubert Delzangles, professor of public law at the Institut d'études politiques in Bordeaux, Jean-Philippe Ferreira, professor of public law at the University of Bordeaux, Charles Froger, lecturer in public law at the University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Joelle Grogan, senior research fellow affiliated with the Sutherland School of Law in Dublin, Sébastien Martin and Marie Padilla, lecturers at the University of Bordeaux, and Thomas Perroud, professor of public law at the University of Paris-Panthéon-Assas.