Pave: Ex-Jack, The Adventure Continues III

First, a little homework:

Preamble: The French people solemnly proclaim their attachment to the Rights of Man...

Preamble, Article 1: France...shall ensure the equality of all citizens before the law, without distinction of origin, race or religion. ...

Title IX, Article 67 (§1): The President of the Republic shall incur no liability by reason of acts carried out in this official capacity, subject to the provisions of Articles 53-2 and 68 hereof.

Constitution of 4 October 1958
(the current constitution recognized in France)

Article 15: Society has the right to require of every public agent an account of his administration.

Article 16: A society in which the observance of the law is not assured, nor the separation of powers defined, has no constitution at all.

La Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme
et du Citoyen de 1789
(August 26, 1789 )

The 1789 Declaration of the rights of man and the citizen was inspired by the American Declaration of Independence of 1776. The French Declaration marked the end of the Ancien Régime and the dawn of a new era. The Constitution of the Fifth Republic explicitly refers to this Declaration, which is now one of our founding texts. ... The Declaration also recognizes equality, notably before the law and justice.

The Declaration of the Human Rights (1789)
from the prefatory text* on the official Web site
of the Président de la République

Now, Ex-Jack:

JACQUES CHIRAC ANNONCE QU'IL NE TÉMOIGNERA PAS
DANS L'AFFAIRE CLEARSTREAM
[EX-JACK DECLARES HE WILL NOT TESTIFY
IN THE CLEARSTREAM AFFAIR]

23 juin 2007 (20minutes.fr/AFP) - "Le président Chirac rappelle qu'aux termes de l'article 67 alinéa 1er de la Constitution, le Président de la République n'est pas responsable des actes accomplis en cette qualité", a indiqué vendredi son bureau dans un communiqué, en citant également l'article 16 de la Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du citoyen.

Ces dispositions "excluent qu'un ancien chef de l'Etat puisse être contraint à fournir un témoignage sur des faits accomplis ou connus durant son mandat et dans l'exercice de ses fonctions".

"Cette position de principe, conforme à la tradition républicaine et qui était celle de son prédécesseur, n'autorise pas le président Chirac à répondre favorablement à la démarche des juges d'Huy et Pons (chargés du dossier Clearstream, ndlr). Il leur a écrit en ce sens", a souligné le bureau de M. Chirac.

["Ex-Jack points out that under article 67 subparagraph one of the Constitution, the President of the Republic is not responsible for acts committed in this capacity", Ex-Jack's office said in a Friday press release, as well as citing article 16 of the Declaration of the rights of man and of the citizen."

This is all a little astonishing. The relevant article of the Declaration of the rights of man and of the citizen ("Declaration"), conspicuously not cited, is Article 15, which clearly calls Ex-Jack to account.

[These provisions "exclude a former Head of the State being constrained to provide testimony on actions or known facts during his mandate and in the performance of his duties".]

Well, that is an inventive reading of the plain language of Article 67, §1, quoted in full above. We have no standing as a professional jurist nor are we intimate with French constitutional case law. We can only give a plain reading to plain language.

Article 67 provides for the immunity from prosecution of the president during his term for any acts in his capacity as president. Nowhere in the Constitutional provisions of the president (Title II) is the president authorized to commit criminal acts for personal advantage.** The issues before the bar in the Clearstream affair*** have to do with Ex-Jack acting in a personal capacity for his own political gain (and vengeance) not in a presidential capacity in the furtherance of the interests of state.

Further, immunity from prosecution is not the same as an immunity from testifying. Article 15 of the Declaration requires Ex-Jack to give a full accounting of his administration as president. There is nothing incompatible with Ex-Jack's obligation to testify, that is give an account, and the provisions of Articles 67 and 68 of the Constitution, however interpreted.

["This position of principle, in conformity with the Republican tradition, which was that of his predecessor, does not allow Ex-Jack to respond favorably to the request of judges d' Huy and Pons (charged with the Clearstream file: ed.). He has written them of this position", the office of Mr. Chirac emphasized.]

[Hat tip: Carine]

Some position. Some prinicple. A position of privilege before the law. The criminal principle of self-preservation.

------------------------------------
* Quoting from the Encyclopedia Britannica (originally a Scottish, then American, now Swiss-run enterprise). The French version, which is essentially the same, carries no attribution. One might think French pride would dictate French authorship, that some sub-sub-sub-sub-subaltern's aide could be found to write up a little puff on France's founding documents. Apparently one would think wrong.

*** See here and here for background, it's quite a story.

PFFT (What is this?): Republican principle 0 | Civic committment to truth 0 | Rayonnement français 0 (There is no lower rating)