Criminal integrity and the accountability of members of Parliament
I want a Republic where the office protects democratic debate and where accountability protects the French people. Article 26 of the Constitution protects members of Parliament for the opinions and votes they express in carrying out their duties. This protection is essential. It guarantees that a deputy or senator can speak, vote, oppose, hold the Government to account, and defend a conviction freely. It protects the mandate entrusted to them by voters. It also shields Parliament from pressures that could stifle democratic debate.
Constitutional protection of the parliamentary mandate
Measures that deprive or restrict a member of Parliament's liberty require authorization from the bureau of the relevant chamber, except in cases of a flagrant offense or a final conviction.
This protection must stay tied to its purpose. It covers political speech. It covers voting. It covers the parliamentary role. It guarantees the freedom of the people's elected representatives.
Serious criminal offenses and the demand for accountability
Serious criminal offenses belong to a different category altogether. Corruption, fraud, embezzlement, concealment, abuse of office, major conflicts of interest, or a deliberate betrayal of the national interest call for a response that is clear, visible, and independent.
The French accept authority when they see justice at work. They accept making an effort when they see leaders set the example. They accept the rules when they know those rules also bind the people who write them. That is why I want to build a clearer framework of criminal integrity for public officials.
This framework respects the constitutional protection given to members of Parliament in carrying out their mandate. It draws a clear line between political freedom and personal wrongdoing. It protects debate. It exposes abuse. It lets justice move forward with composure, method, and authority.
The Court of Justice of the Republic and members of Government
For members of the Government, I am keeping the institutional principle of the Court of Justice of the Republic. Article 68-1 of the Constitution provides that members of the Government are criminally liable for acts carried out in the course of their duties when those acts amount to crimes or offenses. Such acts fall under the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the Republic.
I am also keeping the constitutional process for forming this Court. Article 68-2 provides for a Court of fifteen judges: twelve members of Parliament elected by the National Assembly and the Senate in equal numbers after every general or partial renewal, plus three judges from the Court of Cassation, one of whom presides over the Court.
Transparency, traceability, and public integrity
This structure provides a familiar institutional foundation. It now needs to be paired with a stronger demand for transparency, traceability, the publication of each step, and oversight of conflicts of interest.
I want every French citizen to be able to understand who is involved, at what stage, under what rule, within what timeframe, and held to what standard of accountability.
Criminal integrity must become a cornerstone of democratic peace.
When a public official carries out their duties properly, a clear rule shields them from blanket suspicion. When serious wrongdoing surfaces, that same rule allows for firm action. The Republic must protect honest elected officials while exposing those who use their office as a shield.
A national public integrity prosecutor's office
I want a national public integrity prosecutor's office tasked with centralizing the most serious complaints, ensuring a solid initial legal review, preserving evidence, referring cases to the competent authorities, and guaranteeing consistent handling nationwide.
This specialized prosecutor's office would operate within the constitutional framework. For a member of Parliament, it respects Article 26 and the freedom of the mandate. For a member of Government, it respects the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the Republic. In every case, it makes the process clearer, faster, more traceable, and easier for citizens to follow. Democracy needs freedom. It also needs rigor.
Politics exercises decision-making. Justice oversees wrongdoing. The people entrust the responsibility.