With France

Although described as a fad ¹ by some independence supporters, federalism constitutes on the contrary the only solution bringing together all the visions proposed to date by the different political movements concerning the institutional future of New Caledonia, even the most opposed ones which are: for or against independence.

Professor Philippe Ardant, a French constitutionalist, stated that federalism is particularly suited to countries in which populations of different races, religions and languages ​​live, each with its own history […] Federalism allows minorities to largely self-administer while respecting their customs ² .

Regarding New Caledonia, Florence Faberon, a professor at the University of Guyana in 2015, stated that the federal solution does not pit the camps against each other . On the contrary, it allows for the demands of each to be linked: a state for the independence supporters, and remaining within France for the non-independence supporters.

Indeed, starting with the most radical non-independence supporters who have the support of the State, in favor of maintaining a New Caledonia anchored forever within the French Republic, the establishment of a federated status would make it possible to postpone the fateful deadline of independence again and avoid what the State fears most, namely a “domino effect” which would lead other overseas territories to also demand full sovereignty.

For moderate non-independence supporters, referred to as autonomists, federal status would allow for the proposal of a new status for those aged 30 to 50, replacing that of the 1998 Noumea Peace Accords, which had expired, and thus continue to move forward on a so-called draft status that would achieve consensus before any other development. A draft referendum was to be held before the end of 2023 ³ on this subject. Unfortunately, as the parties have still not reached an agreement, it has been postponed ⁴ and then canceled ^5 6 for the time being.

For the centrists, a new status would allow the development of New Caledonia to continue over the same period as that proposed by the autonomists, whose objective would be to train Caledonians in sectors hitherto reserved for the State, such as sovereign domains (justice, internal security, etc.), with a view to a possible development once the period of 30 to 50 years has elapsed.

On the side of the moderate separatists, a federal/federated status between France and New Caledonia would allow the creation of a State for this overseas territory. The Kanaks have already made it known that any project that would be proposed not presenting the creation of a State would be null and void in their eyes. New Caledonia already having legislative and executive power and in order to respect the principles of Montesquieu, the creation of a State would consist of recovering the judicial power, in addition to the first two, and by the same its armed wing which is the forces of law and order (police, gendarmerie) , one does not go without the other . The other sovereign powers (army, diplomacy, currency) remain with the French State , thus returning to the bases of what colonization should have been, namely a protectorate ⁷ or dominion among the British. As a reminder, the British, in order to administer their immense colonial empire, preferred to leave existing institutions in place and add a British advisor rather than replace everything with a colonial administration. France, for its part, preferred direct administration, eliminating or devaluing the old indigenous monarchies and exercising all responsibilities and centralizing all powers there. The elimination and replacement of the old elites was at the origin of political instability during the creation of these new states, once they became independent. If this principle of returning to the protectorate can be close to the “associated state” advocated by certain independence activists, it is important to distinguish between the notions of “associated state”, “federated state” and “independence-association” in order to avoid any misunderstandings. If the associated State and the federated State can be close according to the former Minister of Justice, Jean-Jacques Urvoas ⁸ , their proximity is understood here only by the fact that they are both non-sovereign . Sovereignty being attached to the exercise of sovereign powers and remaining here in France, thus distinguishing itself from the notion of independence-association that certain independentists advocate, which aims to recover sovereign powers to then establish partnerships with France or other States for the installation for example of military bases, … France and the non-independentists do not want this option, it is therefore unlikely that it will succeed, unlike the federated but non-sovereign State .

Sovereignty is found, once judicial competence has been recovered, in the fact of also recovering the competence linked to article 27 of the organic law of 1999. This is so that the Caledonian executive bodies and the administrative acts issued by them are no longer subject to the legality control of the State, thus obtaining Caledonian administrative authorities independent of the State . Then, it will be appropriate to request that the laws of countries specific to Caledonian competences are no longer submitted for advice and control by the State , neither by the Council of State, nor by the Constitutional Council, as our Anglo-Saxon neighbors Australia, New Zealand, Canada have been able to do with the United Kingdom which recognized their legislative sovereignty in particular by the Treaty of Westminster ^9. New Caledonia would thus become “independent” and “sovereign” over its own competences (tourism, mines, education, agriculture, health, etc.). The State remaining sovereign over its sovereign powers . As a result, the electoral body would remain “frozen” with the creation at least of a citizenship or even of a dual nationality of Caledonia and France. The right to self-determination also remains according to the principles of the UN because the status of federated State presented here would initially be an extension of the peace agreements, also extending the sui generis status of New Caledonia in the French constitution, until independence or remaining in France via this federal system.

It should be noted that between 2035 and 2053, New Caledonia will reach the global average duration of colonization by a European state of between 182 and 200 years . Thus, with decolonization beginning on the first day of colonization, the justified notion of independence will inevitably have to be addressed, especially since 2053 will mark the bicentenary of the taking of possession of New Caledonia by France . The federated state thus provides a first peaceful solution to this claim; it remains for France, which some describe as a “federation that ignores itself ¹⁰ ,” to seize the opportunity to no longer see New Caledonia as a threat.

While some believe that there cannot be two federated states with a large country on one side and a small one on the other ¹¹ , institutional experts assert the opposite, such as Florence Faberon, who states that the construction of a France that can reconcile its unitary nature and a federal character with regard to a single member state (New Caledonia) is legally possible . However, if the uniqueness of the proposal for a federated state were to pose a problem, France could very well extend the notion of federalism to the whole of French overseas territories, as General de Gaulle did with the French Community, particularly for African countries. It would perhaps be appropriate in this respect to reactivate Articles 78 et seq. of the Constitution with a view to restoring a Community, this time overseas, with, however, the prior opinion of the overseas populations on the wording and mode of operation of this Community in order to avoid the errors made 60 years ago.

In 2022, the presidents of the various overseas regions of France (Martinique, Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Réunion, Mayotte, St-Martin), in view of the increasingly glaring inequalities within their territories and growing poverty, have, through a joint open letter entitled “The Appeal of Fort de France” addressed to the State , requested the urgent opening of a new historic stage for the overseas territories , via the overhaul of relations between their territories and the Republic through a new constitutional framework for the overseas territories in France , allowing the implementation of public policies in line with realities, the recognition of their specificities and the domiciliation of decision-making levers as close as possible to their territories  (see Appeal of Fort-de-France: Overseas elected officials call on the State to change its aid policy – Outre-mer la 1ère (francetvinfo.fr) )

To return to New Caledonia, the image of a French aircraft carrier in the Pacific has often been given, making the territory a showcase for French culture and the French-speaking world in this region. This often unilateral relationship, from the metropolis to the “Rock” ¹² , could, with this notion of federalism, be reversed, thus making New Caledonia an aircraft carrier heading not for the Pacific but for the metropolis itself and the other overseas territories by proposing to this old country, France, from an old continent ¹³ , to evolve from a unitary, centralizing status to a federal status for both these overseas territories and these metropolitan regions, originally conceived by federalists, to become a “new country”, following the example of what its neighbors, Spain ¹⁴ and Italy ^15 16 , are gradually doing .

As a reminder, this federal vision is one of the 4 solutions proposed by experts Jean Courtial and Ferdinand Mélin-Soucramanien in their report submitted to the Prime Minister of the French Republic in 2014 on the institutional future of New Caledonia , developed within the “extended autonomy” section (see Downloads – APROFED )

To summarize, the Caledonian federated state project would aim to:

– allow a stay in France for a fixed period,

– propose a new 30-year status ,

– allow the creation of a State , therefore of citizenship or even nationality,

– obtain legislative sovereignty (so-called internal) ,

– obtain independent administrative authorities ,

– recover judicial power and public security ,

– leave sovereign powers (army, currency, diplomacy) to the French State

– rediscuss independence from 2035 to acquire it by 2053 at the latest.