A Presidential Veto and a Rushed Parliamentary Override
The National Assembly passes a bill on judicial appointments by 128 votes. The President returns it with a reasoned veto, arguing that it undermines judicial independence. The ruling majority wants to override the veto within a week. A newly elected MP asks the party whip whether the override requires a simple majority of those present or a special majority, whether the President can refuse to sign after an override, and whether the Constitutional Court can be asked to review the law before it is promulgated. The bill's supporters hold 128 of 240 seats; 121 members are present on the override day.
1. What majority is required to override the veto, and is it available here?
Read the worked answer
A presidential veto is overridden by an absolute majority of all members of the National Assembly, that is, more than half of 240, or at least 121 votes. A simple majority of those present is not enough. With 121 members present, the supporters need all 121 votes cast in favor; any absence or abstention among them defeats the override. The whip should count not seats held but members actually voting in favor, and should ensure the quorum and the absolute-majority threshold are both met.
2. Can the President refuse to sign after a valid override, and can the law be reviewed before promulgation?
Read the worked answer
After a valid override, the President must promulgate the law; refusal is not a lawful second veto. As for prior review, the Constitutional Court's abstract review is generally triggered after promulgation, so a pre-promulgation challenge is not the normal route. The realistic sequence is: override, promulgation, then a challenge by authorized bodies such as the President, the Council of Ministers, or a group of MPs. The MP should be advised that the political fight over the override is separate from the later constitutional review.