Since 2010, the French Constitutional Council has ruled on constitutional issues raised during a litigation. Thus whereas during its first fifty years, it had only been allowed to rule a priori abstract review cases, a posteriori concrete constitutional review has been added to the juridiction of the Council by the 2008 constitutional amendment. The fact that in less than two years the Council has ruled on more concrete review cases than in 25 years of abstract review gives us a clear cue that constitutional review in France currently changes a lot.
France have been known for the narrow window for constitutional review in term of access route as well as in term of timing. Between 1974 and 2010, it might only occur in abstracto after the vote of a statute by the Parliament. In fact, laws may be referred to the Constitutional Council by either the President of the Republic, the Prime minister, the presidents of the two chambers or sixty MPs, before they are enacted by the President. Since 2010, according to the constitution, “if during proceedings in progress before a court of law, it is claimed that a legislative provision infringes the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, the matter may be referred by the Conseil d'État or by the Cour de Cassation to the Constitutional Council which shall rule » within a 3 month period.
This major evolution in the institutional settings of the Council gives us an opportunity to investigate the effects of an enlargement of Court access, to compare the two clear cut types of constitutional review as well as their interactions. So the paper will focus on a first analysis of the effects of the 2008 constitutional amendment on judicial review in France.
