Among democratic innovations, deliberative mini-publics, that is panels of randomly selected citizens tasked to make recommendations about public policies, have been increasingly used. In this regard, Ireland stands out as a truly unique case because, on the one hand, it held four consecutive randomly selected citizens' assemblies, and on the other hand, some of those processes produced major political outcomes through three successful referendums; no other country shows such as record. This led many actors to claim that the “Irish model” was replicable in other countries and that it should lead to political “success.” But is this true? Relying on a qualitative empirical case-study, this article analyses different aspects to answer this question: First, the international context in which the Irish deliberative process took place; second, the differences between the various Irish citizens' assemblies; third, their limitations and issues linked to a contrasted institutionalization; and finally, what “institutional model” emerges from Ireland and whether it can be transferred elsewhere.

Alors que la crise du gouvernement représentatif s’intensifie, le tirage au sort est plus que jamais sur le devant de la scène. Après une ère de mini-publics délibératifs n’ayant pas réussi à susciter de changement politique systémique, une seconde vague d’expérimentations démocratiques émerge. Ces dispositifs, davantage empowered et institutionnalisés, s’hybrident avec des formes de démocratie participative, représentative et directe. Mais ils dessinent des dynamiques contrastées pour le futur, entre une radicalisation de la démocratie et une légitimation du gouvernement représentatif.

How to take into account the interests of the soldiers when they do not have the right to strike, go on demonstration, complain in the media or join unions? Facing this dilemma in the troubled and postcolonial context of 1968, the French Parliament decided to create an original deliberative institution to defend the material working conditions of the soldiers: the High Council of the Military Function (Conseil Supérieur de la Fonction Militaire, CFSM). In order to avoid factions, election was rejected and representation was generated through sortition, that is to say random selection. Far from the ad hoc ephemeral democratic innovations based on minipublics, the CSFM gives us the opportunity to study a longstanding institution still existing nowadays. The CSFM gather 79 representatives of soldiers, mirroring the composition of the Army in terms of ranks (private, officer…) and corps (navy, air force…) and 6 representatives of retiree's associations. Until 2016 the Council was deliberating twice a year, studying official reforms projects and giving a formal recommendations and propositions directly to the Minister of Defence, the General Staff and the administration during a plenary face-to-face debate. During 49 years, this institution has faced many changes but the curious forms of representation and accountability at work in the French Army offer food for thoughts when trying to get a new constructivist perspective on representative claims, away from the classical structures of the representative government. Why and how was the CSFM created and modified? What types of representation and deliberation, what types of "representative claims", does it produces? How are accountability and participation of the represented integrated in this martial and sortition based system? What are the effects generated by the CSFM, and which challenges does it faces? This empirical research, mixing history and sociology, try to answers those questions through a longstanding fieldwork study of several years composed of archives, texts analysis, semi-directive interviews and direct ethnographic observations. Résumé : En 1969, les parlementaires admettent que l'interdiction de syndicat dans l'Armée française doit entraîner la création d'une institution représentative et délibérative unique en son genre pour défendre la fonction militaire et les conditions de travail des soldats. 48 ans plus tard, le Conseil Supérieur de la Fonction Militaire est devenu une force de proposition incontournable dialoguant directement avec son Ministre. Ce rare cas d'utilisation institutionnalisée de la sélection aléatoire à des fins délibératives sur le temps long est riche d'enseignements pour penser le futur du tirage au sort en politique. Dimitri Courant-Délibération et tirage au sort