;)
Summary and analysis of the interview with MP N. Metzdorf on RRB on 23.08.24
Hello everyone,
The APROFED association is returning to you this week to relay the interview with MP Nicolas Metzdorf dated August 23 of this year as part of the program “Transparency” on the RRB channel.
During this interview, he announced that the non-independence movement was working on a joint proposal for a federal-type organisation of New Caledonia.
He recalls the examples of countries that have adopted a federal status, particularly in the Pacific region, the best known of which are: Australia and the United States.
This loyalist project would aim to establish a so-called “internal” federal organization in New Caledonia with a “federal regional” operation which would replace the provinces with a supranational organization, that is to say a federal government at the territorial level coordinating in particular the “country laws” for the entire territory.
He believes that the Noumea Accords did not work but nevertheless recalls that he is opposed to the idea of any partition.
It also stipulates that this project will not lead to New Caledonia becoming a State .
Following these remarks, the APROFED association welcomes the fact that the notion of federalism has finally reappeared as a possible solution to the current situation the country is going through.
It should be recalled that this solution was discussed behind closed doors in the greatest secrecy between local elected officials since mid-February 2024 and that this discussion unfortunately came to an abrupt halt at the start of the insurrection 3 months later.
While we welcome this progress, it is nevertheless appropriate to carry out an initial analysis of the preliminary draft from the loyalist side, pending a more detailed draft which would be presented to the population.
On the fact that the MP does not want New Caledonia to become a State, it should be recalled that the independentists have stipulated that no draft agreement and consequently no negotiations would succeed if New Caledonia did not become a State . The association therefore reminds us that a State is not necessarily sovereign . Thus, New Caledonia could become a non-sovereign State . We will return to our readers and supporters at the end of the week to provide them with some information on this subject. Furthermore, if the term “State” were to pose a problem, it could be replaced by “Country” as suggested by JJ Urvoas, G. Agniel and others.
What matters is that to constitute a State, according to Montesquieu’s definition, it is necessary to manage the 3 powers which are the legislative, the executive and the judiciary . If New Caledonia has the first 2 with the Congress and the provincial assemblies, communes and the government, justice still remains a competence of the State which it will be appropriate, for us, to transfer to the local authorities.
Regarding the comments relating to the failure of the Noumea peace agreement, the association is surprised by this analysis insofar as this agreement has been described by institutional experts in public law as being in a “federal dynamic” although the term no longer appears in the text, unlike the Matignon-Oudinot agreements . The loss of the term is certainly due to the change in presidential majority between the two agreements, moving from the left-wing progressives in 1988 for the Matignon agreement, to the conservative right in 1998 for the Noumea agreement. The association is, however, pleased that local non-independence elected officials, known as right-wing, wish to apply a solution that could be described as left-wing in mainland France.
On the substance of the project aiming to implement an “internal” federalism in New Caledonia, the association warns against this vision . According to experts, there are in fact 2 types of federalism that have been put in place at the territorial level. The first “internal” in its operation with in particular the creation of provinces. The second “external” in the framework of the relationship between Caledonia and the State with in particular the transfer of irreversible powers to the territory, the creation of a Congress voting its own laws, … However, for the association the important thing would be to focus on external and not internal federalism , aiming to have the State accept once and for all the status of federated State for New Caledonia and its consequences included on our site in our solution n°1 thus finalizing what was started with the agreements of 1988 and 1998. A next left-wing government soon at the State level could perhaps allow this progress. It should be remembered that territories integrated into France as departments have recently also asked to review their relations with it, hence the possible interest in reviving the 1958 Community after consulting the overseas territories.
The danger of focusing solely on internal federalism would lead some to attempt, under the cover of a federal project, to relaunch instead that of provincial autonomy and thus partition.
The objective is not to make New Caledonia a federal state but a non-sovereign federated state within a federal France or under “sui generis” status.
As a reminder, it should be noted that almost half of the world’s population lives under a federal status and that the largest economic powers, apart from China, are all federal or confederal states.
Finally, it should be remembered that in 1987, the independentists wishing to draft a constitution for “Kanaky” (New Caledonia), wanted to establish a federal state before being unfortunately advised by a metropolitan law professor who instead steered them towards the choice of a unitary and centralizing state like in France. The 1988 and 1998 agreements, of the federal type, however proved to them that their first idea was the right one in view of the civil peace which lasted almost 40 years until this year of 2024.
Thus, as within our association which brings together both pro-independence and non-independence supporters and people from the main communities of the territory, who considered that federalism was the solution, we hope that our leaders will do the same in the general interest and to the extent that time is running out, the last quarter of 2024 being that of all uncertainties and all dangers, in particular of reproducing the dark hours of the past .
The APROFED association is therefore waiting to see a more complete draft agreement from the loyalists, which would be presented to the independentists with a view to relaunching discussions as soon as possible.
Although it has nothing to do with federalism, it would be appropriate for the association to include in this agreement certain articles as in 1988, with a view to easing tensions, namely the possibility of an amnesty for the perpetrators of the atrocities of the last three months.
We invite you to watch the full video of the MP’s interview at the following link:
Nicolas Metzdorf, le député de la première circonscription (youtube.com)
We wish you a good read and remind you that federalism is the only solution to reconcile unity in diversity.
The APROFED association