On March 4th, 2024, the French parliament decided to enshrine the right to abortion in the Constitution, making France the first country to do so explicitly after Yougoslavia’s implicit decision on the right of having children in 1974. This initiative first started after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2022 in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to overturn the right of abortion of Roe v. Wade of 1973. At that point, the president of the parliamentary group of far-left La France Insoumise, Mathilde Panot, decided to submit a bill to include the right to a safe abortion in the Constitution. This bill was then transformed from a right to a freedom by the Senate before passing the National Assembly in January 2024, the Senate in February and the Parliament on March 4 in a 780-72 vote, as an amendment to Article 34 to include abortion as a guaranteed freedom.
This decision stems from a long historical process. Indeed, while France have experienced highs and lows regarding abortion laws throughout its history, real changes happened after the civil rights unrest period of May 1968 where equal rights for women became a central subject of discussion. This was the momentum needed for the Veil Act, or Law 75-17, to pass on January 15, 1975, decriminalizing abortion, under the Health Minister Simone Veil. This Veil Act was transformed throughout the years to reach today’s historical decision.
Nevertheless, considering the timing and appropriation of this decision for a president who was not at the source of the initiative raises questions on his real motives. Here, one can think in terms of this as a variant of the so-called dead cat strategy. This political strategy initially stems from the idea of a politician, to divert media attention from some of his controversial politics or failures, making an unexpected or shocking announcement, such as pointing to a dead cat. This strategy is often associated to Boris Johnson and his campaign strategist Lynton Crosby. In the case of Macron, not only does he need to divert the media attention from his failures but also the public attention which has, during his term and a half in office, been profoundly degrading. Simultaneously, studies on political behavior, especially relative to national economy and elections, have shown that voters often substitute the last year or years of a president term’s performance to the cumulative growth to make their judgement on the president. In Macron’s case, this means that this landmark could be more considered for voters in 2027 than previous cumulative failures of the government.
Indeed, while this historical decision needs not to be overlooked, the risk of associating it mostly with the current president is to forget every controversies his presidency has brought. The fact his presidency was ran by the constitutional Article 49.3 allowing the government to force a law without vote, used 23 times in 18 months, particularly highlights the fundamental division between the government and the voters. The yellow jacket movement, the pension reform strikes, the retirement reform, or the recent controversial immigration law all contributed in decreasing his political credit. The succession of Prime Ministers' resignations and the controversial appointment of Gabriel Attal also highlights issues within the government, reinforced by the recent controversy over the now-dismissed Minister of Education Amélie Oudéa-Castéra. The fact recalling all of Macron’s controversies is now overpowered by his last few months’ actions highlights exactly the strategic dynamics described before.
The use by the President of this decisive landmark vote helps create a veil over the past decisions the government has taken. Macron currently lacks a majority in the National Assembly and his current government is more turned towards the right than it originally claimed. With European elections approaching and keeping in line the 2027 election, a change of narrative was needed. The abortion initiative allowed him to recenter his party while, if the far-right opposed the decision, causing its main political rival to lose popular credit. Indeed, overall, as abortion is seen positively by 83% of the population and its enshrining in the Constitution by 81%, pushing forward this decision is a smart political move to regain necessary support. His popularity among the population being overall low, with recent polls showing 66% of dissatisfaction, have reasons to worry him and make him want to divert attention. This focus on abortion in itself could also help currently low women support for a President often criticized for his pro-abuser stance. Thus, the press now tendency to associate this historical decision to Macron highlights the success of this dead cat strategy.
As the next presidential elections are coming up fast, considering political exploitations of issues is crucial. This goes beyond the French zeitgeist as this dead cat strategy is common among politicians globally. Looking beyond recent positive advancements, being in economic, social or political terms to be able to evaluate cumulatively and comprehensively candidates is central for electors to make well-informed choices. In France, while saluting this historical decision, understanding potential political gains for a government that has already considered amending the Constitution for Macron to be reelected is central to preserve current democratic safeguards and make enlightened decisions about the nation’s political future.