13 décembre 2021
info:eu-repo/semantics/OpenAccess
Manon Birgolotti, « Le bicamérisme en droit comparé : la confrontation de la France et de l'Italie », HAL-SHS : sciences politiques, ID : 10670/1.g3n9bh
From the point of view of constitutional law, France and Italy have many characteristics in common: they are republics born in the aftermath of the Second World War (in 1947 for Italy, in 1958 for France, although we should not forget the Fourth Republic, inaugurated in 1946); they are parliamentary regimes (if this is clear for Italy, it should be for France which, despite the importance of the head of state, remains an original variety of parliamentarianism); and they are states that have adopted bicameralism. Despite these similarities, bicameralism is conceived very differently in France and Italy. This is explained by the historical circumstances of the post-war period. In our neighbouring countries, bicameralism is egalitarian and there are few cases where the two assemblies are not associated on an equal footing. This is not the case in France, whether we consider the Fourth or the Fifth Republic. At present, the bicameralism imagined by the Constituents - whether egalitarian or unequal - is struggling to find its legitimacy. This dysfunction poses a problem since it is the parliamentary functions that justify the existence of a second chamber. An optimal use of parliamentary functions remains the basis of bicameralism. As a result, bicameralism as envisaged by the Constituents has become obsolete and lacks legitimacy. In order to legitimise the existence of the second chamber again, several perspectives of evolution have been or could be envisaged.