Nothing is right between the head of state and Parliament. Indeed, Mr. Qais Saeed, President of the Republic, has decided to exercise his constitutional prerogatives. He decided on Saturday evening to send the bill amending the Constitutional Court Act 2015 to the Parliamentary Assembly for a second reading. In fact, article 81 of the Constitution allows it.

Article 81 of the Constitution

Moreover, it could not be more explicit: “With the exception of constitutional bills, the President of the Republic may, by giving reasons for his decision, refer the bill to the Assembly for a second reading, in a 5 days from:
1. The expiry of the period of unconstitutionality appeal without exercise of the latter, in accordance with the provisions of the 1st indent of Article 120;
2. The pronouncement of a decision on constitutionality or the compulsory transmission of the bill to the President of the Republic, in accordance with the provisions of the third paragraph of article 121, in the event of an appeal within the meaning of the provisions of the 1st indent of the section 120.
Ordinary bills are adopted, after referral, by an absolute majority of the members of the Assembly, organic bills are adopted by a majority of three-fifths of the members. ”

Looming War

Besides, it looks like yet another illustration of a latent latent war. Indeed, it is revealing an open secret to agree that there has been, since 2019, a trench warfare between the President of the Republic on the one hand, the Head of Government and the President of the Parliament of the other. However, Mr. Kaïs Saïed had plenty of time to appoint the last two heads of government, successively Mr. Elyès Fakhfakh and Hichem Mechichi. As a result, his brushes get tangled up with the ones he named!

What Prospects?

Obviously, the reactions were quick. From Saturday April 3 at the end of the evening, Ennahdha and his allies showed their anger. This was not without invectives and particularly virulent charges among some detractors of the presidential initiative. Until now they had paid little attention to the establishment of the Constitutional Court. Yet constitutionally, it had to be in place no later than 2015. As long as it suited their needs, they happily did without. But there. As Kaïs Saïed refuses to endorse the January 16 reshuffle, they have realized that they can only remove him through the Constitutional Court. From then on, they got down to it. Opportunism when you hold us.

Plausible Referendum

Come to think of it, it’s a dead end. The bill is unlikely to pass second reading. And then there is also article 82 of the Constitution. Indeed, does President Kaïs Saïed intend to refer it?
The interpretation is admittedly restrictive. But at the rate we’re at, you never know. Article 82 in question stipulates the following: “Exceptionally and during the deadline for referral, the President of the Republic may decide to submit to referendum the bills adopted by the Assembly of People’s Representatives relating to the approval. international treaties, human rights and freedoms or personal status. Recourse to a referendum constitutes a waiver of the right of referral. ”

Who Interprets the Constitution?

In the background, the question remains unanswered. Who interprets the Constitution in the absence of the Constitutional Court? In fact, the vacuum pleads in favor of the only President of the Republic. Indeed, it would even be, under current conditions, the only one empowered to be able to interpret the Constitution. Professor Slim Loghmani attested to this. And the President of the Republic does not deprive himself of this factual manna, so to speak.
It remains to be seen how the deputies plan to react. The election session of the three other members of the Constitutional Court, including Parliament, which Parliament must fulfill, was scheduled for Thursday, April 8. What will it be? We’ll find out in the next few hours.

The Blockage is Rife

In any case, for the moment, the institutional blockage is rife. It all depends ultimately on the goodwill of the head of state. This is hardly reassuring in practice, but it is inevitable. In truth, no one could impose it on him. And even less to dismiss him, in the absence of the proper Constitutional Court.
In fact, one could invoke the theory of impossible formalities. But this is only a doctrinal theory and constitutional law, like all law, is first and foremost dependent on precise, questionable and objectionable procedures in virtue of appropriate texts.
The way out of the crisis? For now, only consensus at the head of state could trigger a saving process. Otherwise, the blockage will continue to prevail. And the bidding will dry up more in the speeches, alas!