“Benalla Commission”, Covid-19, consulting firms or even in connection with the youngest, the Orpea affair. Commissions of inquiry have succeeded in recent years in Parliament, like so many courts of the Republic responsible for lifting the veil on scandals. Their hearings, those of Alexandre Benalla, Vincent Bolloré or the McKinsey firm, are sometimes highly publicized. Then the legislative work
remains anonymous, until the publication of a report weeks later. In the Senate, a commission of inquiry into the “control” of nursing homes should be created. In the viewfinder, Orpea, in turmoil since the publication of the book-investigation The Gravediggerswhich reveals how the nursing homes of the group mistreat some of their residents.
But do not confuse this commission of inquiry with the Social Affairs Commission of the National Assembly, which has already questioned, Wednesday, February 2, the new CEO of the Orpea group, Philippe Charrier. So what is a commission of inquiry and what is it for? 20 minutes enlightens you with the support of public law specialist Dorothée Reignier.
What is a commission of inquiry?
This is a group of parliamentarians responsible for shedding light on a public matter. If they already exist before, it is the ordinance of November 17, 1958 which gives them life under the Fifth Republic, with a strong framework. The first limit is that of their lifespan, six months maximum. Their creation is also framed: if “the initiative of a single parliamentarian can be enough to trigger it”, indicates Dorothée Reignier, lecturer in public law at Sciences Po Lille, the filing of the request must clearly expose the objects of the investigation and be examined by the relevant standing committee (the Social Affairs Committee for the Orpea affair).
Important detail in this case, it is the permanent committee in the Senate which “asked to form a committee of inquiry” on Tuesday, considering that the gravity of the facts required “investigative powers which it does not have. ‘habit “.
Finally, they are made up proportionally from the groups, “which means that the majority is the majority”, specifies Dorothée Reignier. In the National Assembly, they will therefore be dominated by LREM, and composed of a maximum of 30 deputies, against 23 senators with an LR majority in the Senate. Because the commissions do not “mix” the elected representatives of the two assemblies.
Over time, the right of these commissions of inquiry has been strengthened. Thus, “the position of rapporteur or president falls by right to a member of the opposition or of a minority group”, underlines the researcher. Either the group that requested the creation of the commission, by “right of drawing”, a procedure created in 1988 “to ensure that the opposition has the possibility” to carry out an investigation into the action of the government. Useful when both rooms have the same color.
What is a commission of inquiry?
“Consecrated by the Constitution since 2008”, the commissions of inquiry are attached “to the mission of control and evaluation” of Parliament, explains Dorothée Reignier. The object of these commissions must relate to “specific facts”, as in the Orpea affair, or to “the management of public services or national companies”. But they must respect the principle of separation of powers: creating a commission of inquiry on “the action of the President of the Republic” is impossible, but on that of the government yes, details the Lille academic.
Ditto for the independence of justice. The Keeper of the Seals is also notified of any creation of a commission of inquiry, and they must not relate to facts that are already the subject of legal proceedings. The best example is that of “the so-called Benalla commission, but which actually focused on the dysfunctions of the Elysée cabinet that allowed the events of the Contrescarpe”, image Dorothée Reignier.
The rapporteur nevertheless has the possibility of investigating “on the spot”, by “going to where the facts took place”, and “on the record”, by having all the documents deemed necessary communicated to him, in addition to the mediated hearings. Any refusal may also give rise to a request for the opening of legal proceedings, and be punished by two years in prison and a fine of 7,500 euros, and up to five years in prison and a fine of 75,000 euros for “false testimony “.
At the end of the six-month investigation, the rapporteur must, as his name indicates, “write a report whose objective is to list the dysfunctions” observed, and formulate “recommendations for adapting the law”, in order to that “the legislative arsenal adapts to a situation” which was not foreseen. Within six months of this report, a member of the permanent committee in charge of the file (still the Social Affairs Committee for the Orpea example) must “check whether the government has taken up the project or not” and monitor the progress of a possible bill. The most striking example for Dorothée Reignier is “the commission of the Outreau affair, which changed the information of the magistrates to avoid a new scandal”.
Why are commissions of inquiry multiplying?
The explanation is “political”, according to Dorothée Reignier. The majority of commissions of inquiry are created in the Senate, dominated by Les Républicains. This will still be the case with the Orpea commission, but also with the Benalla affair, with the management of the Covid-19 epidemic or with the influence (and cost) of consulting firms on public policies. “It is the way for the Senate to emphasize the dysfunctions that the government has not managed,” she insists.
The public law specialist even evokes “a political weapon to justify the existence of the Senate”, which has the advantage of being a permanent Chamber, with continuity. Quite the opposite of the Assembly, acquired by the presidential majority and which no longer has the right, being in the last session before the presidential election, to create a commission by “right of drawing”.