Wise Men not so Wise

The Constitutional Council is the embodiment of wisdom and is responsible for defending the rule of law and the individual freedoms of the French people, by censuring a law if it considers it unconstitutional. Discretionarily appointed by the three highest authorities of the State for a non-renewable nine-year term, its members are nevertheless the subject of much controversy: - This Institution is in fact the watchdog of the Head of State, and not of the rule of law; - Since its creation by General De Gaulle, its 92 members, most of them in their seventies, have been appointed based solely on political criteria or reasons of simple cronyism, old friendship, in gratitude for services rendered or simply on a whim. The General, Georges Pompidou, François Mitterrand, Jacques Chirac and Emmanuel Macron have appointed their close friends, often even their confidants (such as Richard Ferrand in 2025), to head the Constitutional Council. A pinnacle of insiders that does not bode well for the impartiality and independence of the nine judges. - To facilitate “the constitutional passage by force” or to validate campaign accounts that have been greatly exceeded, the head of state relies on the “Sages”. A reading of the archives of the minutes of the plenary sessions of the Constitutional Council now makes it possible to state that the nine “Sages” have regularly flouted the law for 67 years. France is the only country in the world where former heads of state sit on a Constitutional Court as ex officio and life members. Three parliamentary attempts have mysteriously failed to put an end to this incredible tradition. Nicolas Sarkozy, still “Wise” for life, is now wearing an electronic bracelet because of his multiple convictions. It has also come to light that the remuneration of the Wise Men, whether or not they sit on the court, has remained illegal for 24 years. The “Sages” perform a moderate job with a comfortable income (22,000 to 32,000 euros), which they can combine with several pensions, completely illegally. This serious journalistic investigation, written by one of the most renowned journalists in this field, reveals an impressive number of worrying and aberrant dysfunctions of this supreme and very “political” regulator of our democracy. Protected by a court spirit violently hostile to any transparency, the “Wise Men” dangerously fuel the ambient populism and the growing lack of confidence of the French in their elites.