In a nutshell

In a recent op-ed for Le Monde, former presidential advisor Pierre-Yves Bocquet and Senator Eric Kerrouche warn of the dangers of a misused referendum, which could be turned against democracy itself. They analyze a constitutional bill being debated in the Senate aimed at enshrining Article 89 as the sole path for revising the French Constitution, thereby sidelining the controversial Article 11 (used in the past to bypass Parliament).

The authors argue that the ambition behind restoring Article 11, notably championed by the National Rally for its proposed referendum on immigration, is not to give voice to the people but to “silence the checks and balances,” such as the Parliament and the Constitutional Council. They describe this maneuver as an “illiberal plebiscitary” peril, where a direct majority vote would be used to dismantle institutional safeguards.

Our Take

This French debate perfectly illustrates a central concern for The 451 Institute: the superiority of checks and balances over simple majoritarian rule. The authors’ warning against a “plebiscite” echoes what we identify as the risk of “tyranny of the majority” or “majority overreach.” When a democratic tool is used to bypass parliamentary debate and consensus-building processes, it loses its legitimacy.

Our mission is to protect essential institutions from political manipulation and to promote frameworks that prevent majorities from unjustly limiting fundamental freedoms. Defending the procedures of decision-making, like the constitutional amendment process, is as crucial as defending democracy itself. It is by preserving these safeguards that we prevent polarization from escalating into conflict and protect the integrity of our institutions.