The Sixth Republic: proposals under debate

For several decades, political leaders and legal scholars have proposed replacing the 1958 Constitution with a new one, that of a Sixth Republic. Their projects differ, and their opponents defend the stability of the current institutions.

Where does the idea come from?

As early as 1958, part of the left criticised the Constitution of the Fifth Republic. In 1964, François Mitterrand published Le Coup d'État permanent, a pamphlet against the Gaullist practice of power. Once elected in 1981, he nonetheless kept the institutions.

The expression “Sixth Republic” spread in the early 2000s. In 2001, Socialist deputy Arnaud Montebourg and political scientist Bastien François founded the Convention pour la 6e République. Since then, the idea has been backed by several parties and candidates, with different content.

Who proposes it today?

La France insoumise makes it one of its main proposals. It proposes convening a constituent assembly, elected to draft a new Constitution, which would then be submitted to a referendum.
Les Écologistes and other left-wing parties have also advocated, to varying degrees, a move to a Sixth Republic or a far-reaching reform of the institutions.
The gilets jaunes movement, in 2018 and 2019, popularised the demand for a citizens' initiative referendum, often associated with these projects.

Other officials, on the right, in the centre or in the Rassemblement national, propose institutional reforms, such as proportional representation or wider use of referendums, without changing the regime.

What would it change, according to its supporters?

There is no single project. The most common proposals are as follows:

reducing the powers of the president, or even ending his election by direct universal suffrage;
strengthening Parliament and abolishing or limiting Article 49, paragraph 3;
electing deputies by proportional representation;
creating a citizens' initiative referendum and a right to recall elected officials;
reforming or abolishing the Senate;
enshrining new social or environmental rights in the Constitution.

Arguments of supporters

Advocates of a Sixth Republic believe that the Fifth concentrates too much power in the hands of the president. They consider Parliament weakened and citizens insufficiently involved in decisions. They cite high abstention and distrust of political leaders as signs of a democratic crisis. They see in a new Constitution, drafted by an elected assembly, a way to rebuild the link between citizens and institutions.

Arguments of opponents

Defenders of the current institutions highlight the stability they have provided since 1958, after the instability of the Third and Fourth Republics. They point out that the Constitution has been revised many times and can still evolve without changing the regime. They stress that the Fifth Republic has functioned both under cohabitation and with a relative majority. Some believe that a return to a parliamentary regime, with proportional representation, would make it harder to form lasting governments. Others argue that a constituent assembly would open a period of uncertainty.

How can the Constitution be changed?

The current Constitution provides only one revision procedure, under Article 89: a vote by both assemblies followed by a referendum, or a vote by Congress with a three-fifths majority. The election of a constituent assembly is not provided for. Its supporters envisage going through a referendum, relying on the precedent of 1962 and on Article 11. This point is the subject of legal debate.

A theme of the 2027 campaign

Institutional questions have returned to the debate since the 2024 dissolution and the absence of an absolute majority in the National Assembly. Candidates in the 2027 election are taking positions on proportional representation, referendums and the balance of powers. Comparing their proposals shows which measures amount to reform of the Fifth Republic and which amount to a change of regime.