France is moving forward with a divisive immigration law, despite many of its measures being invalidated by the Constitutional Council. The rejected measures, which were added under right-wing and far-right pressure, aimed to intensify immigration regulations. However, the law still represents a hardening of immigration rules, allowing for the deportation of foreigners with criminal convictions who are legally residing in France. Even individuals who arrived in France before the age of 13 or have been living in the country for over 20 years could be expelled if they receive significant jail sentences and are deemed a “grave threat to public order”.
Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin defended the law after the Constitutional Council ruling, stating that all the government’s measures had been validated and it was time to implement the law. The details for enforcing the law will be provided on Friday, with French prefects being responsible for reviewing cases and deciding which offenders should be expelled starting in February or March.
Although the law includes certain measures that prevent the detention of individuals under the age of 18 and grants one-year residence permits to undocumented workers in sectors facing labor shortages, it has faced criticism from left-wing parties. They accuse President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist Renaissance party of enabling the far right and betraying their own convictions. Some Renaissance MPs also refused to support the law.
The ruling by the Constitutional Council coincided with the release of France’s latest migration figures, revealing a 10.7% increase in the number of foreign offenders expelled in 2023 compared to the previous year. Asylum applications also rose by 8.6% in 2023 to nearly 142,500, albeit at a slower rate than the previous year.
President Macron, facing upcoming European Parliament elections and lacking a majority in the National Assembly, is confronting a strong challenge from far-right parties. He relies on support from parties outside the government to pass legislation. It was only five weeks ago that the government managed to pass the immigration law, with support from right-wing Republicans and the far-right National Rally (RN).
To secure the passage of the law, the government accepted additional amendments, including restrictions on family reunifications and reduced access to welfare. However, these amendments were subsequently thrown out by the Constitutional Council. Despite the rejection of these added measures, government officials claim victory as the original measures remained intact.
The French right is now calling for a second immigration bill, but the interior minister has made it clear that he has no intention of proposing one. Republicans leader Eric Ciotti stressed the need for constitutional reform to ensure the protection of France’s future. Commentators note that the Constitutional Council rejected the additional measures due to their lack of sufficient linkage to the initial legislation, rather than based on their substance.
The implementation of this controversial immigration law will have wide-ranging impacts. It is likely to stir up further debates around immigration policies and the balance between strict regulations and humanitarian considerations. Advocacy groups may mount legal challenges against the law, questioning its constitutionality and potential human rights violations. The law’s enforcement may also lead to increased tensions and protests from affected communities and activists who believe the law is discriminatory and unjust.
Furthermore, the introduction of stricter immigration measures may have economic implications. Some industries, such as construction, may face labor shortages due to restrictions on undocumented workers, potentially leading to delays, increased costs, or decreased economic activity. On the other hand, proponents argue that tighter immigration controls could protect national security and resources, as well as support the integration of legal immigrants.
As this contentious law takes effect, it is crucial to monitor its implementation and assess its impact on various stakeholders. Policymakers should consider feedback from affected communities and human rights organizations to ensure a balanced approach that respects both security concerns and human dignity.
