5/21/2020
Decision no. 2001-445 DC of June 19, 2001 | Conseil constitutionnel
3. In specifying that a matter that Article 34 classifies among those to be regulated by statute is to be governed by an
institutional act, the constituent authority intended to strengthen the statutory guarantees enjoyed by judges in the
judicial order; the Institutional Act on the status of the judiciary must accordingly itself determine the statutory rules
applicable to judges, subject only to the possibility of leaving it for the authority empowered to make regulations to
determine certain measures implementing the rules that it enacts;
4. Moreover, in the exercise of its powers, the institutional legislature must comply with constitutional rules and
principles; in particular, it must respect not only the principle of the independence of the judicial authority and the
rule that judges may not be removed from office by virtue of Article 64 of the Constitution, but also the principle
declared by Article 6 of the Declaration of Human and Civic Rights that all citizens, being equal in the eyes of the law,
“shall be equally eligible to all high offices, public positions and employments, according to their ability, and without
other distinction than that of their virtues and talents”; it follows from these provisions, with regard to the
recruitment of judges, that account must be taken not only of candidates” abilities, virtues and talents but also that
the only abilities, virtues and talents to be taken into account are those that are relevant to the judicial function and
guarantee the equality of all citizens before the law; finally, magistrates must be treated equally in their career;
(...)
ON CHAPTER IV:
55. Chapter IV entitled “provisions concerning the High Council of the Judiciary” consists of sections 33 to 35;
Regarding the organisation of elections to the High Council of the Judiciary:
56. Section 33, which amends section 3 of the Institutional Act of 5 February 1994 concerning the High Council of the
Judiciary, modi��es the polling techniques for the election to the High Council of the Judiciary of representatives of
judges not exercising the function of President of a court; it introduces proportional representation at the two stages
of the election and lays down rules to secure equal rights for candidates of both sexes; section 34 makes section 33
applicable at the time of the next election to replace the High Council of the Judiciary;
57. The fifth paragraph of Article 3 of the Constitution, as amended by Constitutional Act 99- 569 of 8 July 1999,
provides that “Status shall promote equal access by women and men to electoral mandates and elective offices”, but
it is clear both from the legislative history and from its position in that Article that this provision applies only to
elections to political mandates and offices;
58. The rules enacted to govern the drawing up of lists of candidates for election to high offices, public positions and
employments other than those of a political nature may not, with respect to the principle of equal access stated by
Article 6 of the Declaration of 1789, involve any distinction between candidates on the basis of their sex;
consequently, the provisions of section 33 of the Institutional Act which introduce a distinction according to the sex
in the composition of the lists of candidates for election to the High Council of the Judiciary, are unconstitutional;
59. The other provisions of section 33 are severable from the foregoing provisions and do not call for criticism
regarding their conformity to the Constitution;
(...)
Has decided as follows:
https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/en/decision/2001/2001445DC.htm
2/3