The sovereignty (of the Latin Medieval superanus which derives from the Latin traditional superus " supérieur" ; and of the Greek concept Basileus) is the exclusive right exert the Autorité Politique (legislative, legal and/or executive) on a zone Géographique or a group of Peuple S.

The concept emerges with that of State, with the Middle Ages. The sovereign is thus at the beginning an identified person (the representative of the State, the king) then is detached more and more from his person to become an independent and timeless theoretical concept.

Being in theory only official, one sees appearing today a concept of sovereignty which is detached more and more from the States.

Definition

Legal definition

The concept emerges for the first time with Jean Bodin in the Six books of the Republic (1576). Sovereignty is used as pillar with the analysis of the State and constitutes the criterion of distinction of the various forms of Gouvernement which it describes.

sovereignty is the absolute and perpetual power of a Republic
(the Republic being taken within the meaning of State here).

There is thus convergence between the appearance of the modern States (13th century - 16th century) and the concept of sovereignty. Sovereignty does not belong to an individual (the king), but at the State, represented by one or more individuals.

The definition retained today in Droit is that stated by Louis Fur at the end of the 19th century:

sovereignty is the quality of the State to be obliged or given only by its own will within the limits of the higher principle of the right and in accordance with the collective goal which it has to carry out.

This definition thus retains two criteria:

  • the Sovereign state acts only according to its own will, it is the corollary of the right to the Autodétermination (Droit of the people to lay out of themselves);
  • this will can appear only inside the rules of the right. Nowadays, it is necessary to supplement this definition by another limitation with the sovereignty of the States: the activity of the international organizations, mainly those which exist for inter-official coordination (for France, it is about the European Union primarily, but it can also be a question to a lesser extent of the United Nations or the World Trade organization).

An American political economist, Stephen Krasner, limit dimensions of sovereignty to the questions of Authority and control. However, this position remains contestable.

In France, sovereignty is defined in the Constitution of 1958:

  • Article 2: French language, emblem, anthem, currency, principle,
  • Article 3: popular national sovereignty/, equality women/men,
  • Article 4: roles of the parties and groupings political, principle of Democracy.

Sovereignty is also translated into right by the concept constituting capacity (originating or derived), which enacts legal standards: those of the Constitution. In the classical theory of the Hierarchy of the standards, these standards are higher than all the others. This hierarchy is however put at evil by the questions of the transformation of sovereignty, in particular within sight of the development of the International law and especially of European integration. This complexity of the right involves one in Legal security.

See: Sovereignty of the State and hierarchy of the standards in constitutional jurisprudence.

Relationship between sovereignty and competences

According to the traditional definition of the constitutional Law German, which is very often taken again, sovereignty is the " Competence of the compétence" , i.e. that which Decides which are the people Compétente S for such or such matter is the Souverain. The sovereign can thus delegate or transfer from the Compétence S, without that not touching with its sovereignty, as long as it preserves the possibility of taking again these Compétence S.

In French constitutional law, the Constitutional council distinguishes the transfers from Compétence S by the State French to the European Communities, of the transfers of sovereignty. The first are authorized: they consist of a transfer which is reversible, while the seconds are unconstitutional, because final. However, of many detractors of the Union regard this difference as depending in an only semantic nature, since even if it is possible that France left the Union and finds its full Compétence S, it is highly improbable.

But the sovereign does not delegate all his Compétence S. With emergence, under the effect of the political Libéralisme, of the theory of a State gendarme minimalist, the competences recognized with the State were restricted so that one names his kingly Fonctions, i.e. minimal competences of any sovereign, which can be the subject of no Délégation. However, by the theory of the Welfare state, developed in reaction against the State minimalist, others Competence S, of social order in particular, belongs to the exercise of sovereignty.

traditional kingly Functions

In almost all the State S, sovereignty is exerted at least in the following fields:

However, one could see in certain countries, where the " Liberalism " is thorough to the extreme, that some of these competences can themselves be deputy. It is the case in particular with the the United States of certain functions of a military nature (monitoring…) who are transferred at private companies: the government exerts a kind of sponsorship on private consortia (see Network Centric Warfare).

This evolution, limited to the the United States, does not exert of it less a important Influence in the process of Mondialisation, through the Web.

Other competences

With these traditional fields of competences were added (nonexhaustive list):

  • the Instruction;
  • industrial relations policies: Housing S, Social security, social cohesion, Employment: assumption of responsibility of the risk Unemployment, the industrial accidents… (it should be noted that in France, by a historical characteristic, most of the unemployment risk is dealt with by managements and labor);
  • the Environment: classified Installations, natural disasters, biodiversity…
  • the Culture: it is a significant point for some countries; The France defends the principle of the cultural Exception, while the the United States wish to spread the American way off life.

Moreover, even it is not a question itself of new competences, but of a new application of kingly competences of the State in relatively new fields, one can also quote:

Typology of sovereignties

According to Jean-Fabien Spitz in John Locke and bases of modern freedom (2001), " the introduction concept of sovereignty into political philosophy at the beginning of the modern time seems to have had for effect a final displacement of the relevant questions: it is not a question any more of knowing if a capacity is right (what amounts subordinating the existence of the capacity to its morality), but of knowing to which the capacity belongs to order and how this capacity was conféré."

However, this typology based on the people who have the sovereignty and the way in which this one their was conferred watch his limits today, since it involves confusions. Various modern typologies are thus based on the forms of sovereignty.

Traditional typology

Confusion of the sovereignty of divine right and royal sovereignty

Sovereignty of divine right

In a theocratic mode, sovereignty belongs to the representative of God. There were attempts at theocracy at the 13th century, when the Pape S tried to impose their will to the kings. One remembers the conflicts between Philippe Beautiful the and Boniface VIII on this subject.

royal Sovereignty

In a monarchical mode, sovereignty belongs to the King. In this type of mode, it should be noted that the people preserve a capacity of expression (see in the French history the tradition of the General states).

Confusion

The majority of the monarchical modes are actually of divine right and the popes were also monarchs. One rather opposes spiritual power (direction of the believers) and temporal power (secular). The pope had the two capacities, the first on the Church (community of the believers) while the second limited himself to his grounds. The king, had only the temporal power to him on his subjects.

Popular sovereignty and national sovereignty

Popular sovereignty Defended originally by the revolutionists " radicaux" , in particular by some éminants philosophical of the Lights with in first place J.J Rousseau.

Each Citoyen holds a share of sovereignty and that traditionally results in a mode of Direct democracy, with Vote for all, since no one cannot be dispossessed on behalf of sovereignty which is conferred on each citizen.

Popular sovereignty rests on the Peuple, i.e. the whole of the current citizens of a country (it is thus a real unit, one takes into account the alive ones). It can be expressed directly. If its size obliges it to resort to agents, it will give them only one mandatory instruction: he will say what to them to vote.

On the other hand, which will vote these agents, representing the will of the people obligatorily, will be untouchable and inviolable. The People which cannot take Law S contrary with his interests, the Law are inevitably right: it is the principle of Primauté of the Law.

National sovereignty Defended by the moderate republicans of the end of the XVIII° century.

Here, sovereignty belongs to the Nation, an abstract and indivisible entity. This unit is fictitious since it is not limited to the only citizens present, but includes the Citoyen S last and future; it is higher than the sums (individuals) which compose it.

National sovereignty results in a representative Régime, since the Nation cannot control directly, being fictitious: it thus has there recourse to agents, holders of a representative mandate, the representatives. They work in the interest of the Nation and each one entirely represents it (and not their only voters). The Nation being fictitious, there cannot be of control on them; to prevent that they do not misuse to be able to them, it is necessary to set up countervailing powers (Séparation of the capacities).

National sovereignty also goes in the direction of a Suffrage censitaire, even if she is not opposed basically to a vote for all. Indeed, even while making vote the whole of the citizens of a country, only a negligible part of the Nation could vote. One can thus limit the vote very well to a number a little more limited citizens, by privileging those considered as able (capacity to read and write, include/understand the political life, to have time and independence necessary, from where the criterion of the richness).

Mixture of the two concepts

It should be noted from the start that, even with most extremely of the separation of these two concepts, at the time revolutionary, the terms of national sovereignty and popular sovereignty was synonymous, when well even the two concepts were already separate.

According to article 3 of the Constitution of October 4th, 1958,

national sovereignty belongs to the Peuple which exerts it by its representatives and the way of the Référendum.
Moreover, article 27 lays out that
Any mandatory instruction is null.
Thus, while making coexist a mode representative with procedures of direct democracy, Ve République thus mixes the two concepts.

See also: HTTP: /fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_de_la_France_%28Ve_R%C3%A9publique%29 Constitution of Ve République

Modern typology

One releases today generally three dimensions of sovereignty, though certain authors, like the political economist Stephen Krasner, present some sometimes more.

Domestic sovereignty or intern

This one refers to the administration which a government organizes inside a State and fact call as much to the Autorité (recognition of the Légitimité of a Gouvernement and its actions by the population on which this authority is exerted, for example) that with control (the police force and the application of the Loi S.

Westphalian sovereignty or independence, even interdependence

It results in the exclusion of the external actors in the domestic process of control surface. This exclusion is, in theory, reciprocal between the States, even if the natural tendency is to affirm its independence on the level interns while seeking to influence the Neighboring state.

If the concept of Westphalian sovereignty is recent, its origin, it, is old: following the War Thirty Year old, the Paix of Westphalia in 1648 establishes the concept of territorial sovereignty like doctrines of non-interference in the businesses of others Nation S.

In theory, therefore, in International law, all the States are equal and independent.

In the facts, the sovereignty of the States is not absolute. It is not enough to post principles so that guarantees the Indépendance. They can be influenced, even controlled, by

  • of other States (Impérialisme, Néocolonialisme): the clearest criticism is carried against the the United States, the only super power since the fall of the ex-USSR.
  • of the international organizations, in particular the United Nations.

Stephen Krasner separates from Westphalian sovereignty interdependent sovereignty , which it defines as the capacity of the authorities to control the transborder movements.

However, one can cancel this new typology, since the simple control of the movements at the borders is only one characteristic of protectionism included in the concept of independence.

Legal international sovereignty

This one confers in a State its international recognition. In practice, in fact the other States recognize this sovereignty, by the conclusion of International treaties.

History of sovereignty

Before the appearance of the States, at the 13th century, the capacity was individualized (it belonged to a person, even with a group of people). Moreover, initially, the term of Souverain, which replaced that of Suzerain, nominated only one person, the king in a monarchical system, before being wide with other concepts that the State would represent (the people, the Nation…).

Construction of the States to the the Middle Ages, which continues with the Renaissance

The Italian Rebirth began very early, about the 13th century approximately. To this economic and cultural upheaval, a transformation of the policy was added, with the appearance of the City-States , these primarily maritime République S (Venice, Genoa, Pisa, Amalfi) or Florence. The representative of the State, the Doge, there was elected with life and was in theory revocable.

The French State, it, emerged gradually since the 12th century until the 16th century. This emergence was done by the fight of king de France, who was yet only the Suzerain, against:

  • Outside:

    • the Pope (which, before being a religious leader, was a Head of foreign State):
      • fight of Philippe Beautiful the and Boniface VIII against the bubble Unam Sanctam of this last and victory of Philippe Beautiful the;
      • promulgation by Charles VII of the Pragmatic Sanction, which limited to the profit it royal capacity the rights of the pope as regards nomination to évêchés and the abbeys, of perception of the ecclesiastical incomes, calls, excommunications or interdicts.
    • the emperor of the Holy Germanic Roman Empire: the lawyers released the proverb according to which " the king is emperor in his royaume".

  • Inside:

    • feudal lords, with the means:
      • of an administration submitted to the king and autonomous of the lords, which one can go up the origin with the Missi dominici of Charlemagne, then replaced by the intendants. François Ier is regarded as the first true sovereign (Jean Bodin). Being based on an administration made up of approximately 1500 people, it imposed the French (instead of the Latin ) like Official language of the Droit and the administration by the Ordonnance of Villers-Cotterêts (1539).
      • of an autonomous taxation: the feudal tax (taken by the lord), which dominates of the 10th century at the 13th century centuries, will be gradually replaced by the royal tax. That begins with the ten-per-cent tax from Philippe Beautiful the which founds a system of tax of distribution associating the taking away by fire (hearth), on the grounds and the income; then the Gabelle will come from Jean II.

With the Rebirth, the movement of centralization of the French royal capacity culminated with the Absolute monarchy. The frequency of the General states decreased singularly. Jacques Bénigne Bossuet defines the principles of the Absolutisme, whose Symbole was the reign of the Sun king Louis XIV. This one outlined a unification of the French Droit with the edict of Saint-Germain-in-Bush hammer (1679). However, the essence of the Droit remained usual or canonical.

The centralization, accompanied by the absolutism of the capacity, are French characteristics which are due to the construction of the French State which was done by the fight against the local feudal capacities. In all the other Western States which were built at the same time (empire of Charles Quint, empire of the Crown of England…), the attempts of centralization and absolutism failed. In the others, the construction of the State was prevented by these local authorities (Italy, Germany).

the Lights

New political theories emerged with the Age of Enlightenment, to fight against the sovereign royal capacity (France, the United Kingdom). The philosophers of the Lumières introduced the concepts thus of:

It is Jean-Jacques Rousseau which the most inspired the modern design of sovereignty in France, with Of the social Contract (1762), regarding it as " inaltérable" and " indivisible" , and emanating from the general Will expressed by the people.

Sovereignty then changes hand, it belongs from now on to the Peuple or the Nation (see supra, sovereignties popular and national). These theories were translated into Droit through construction of the State-Nations: France and the United States at the end of the 18th century, 19th century for the remainder of the Europe, except the Empire Austro-Hungarian (1918).

Rise of nationalisms at the 19th century

In Europe

Legal theories came to redefine at the 19th century the concept of sovereignty to justify the power of their State-Nations. The theorists of the public Droit were in particular:

These two last theories are impressed of Idéologie (legal Positivisme).

With the the United States

The construction of the Federal state was done by the opposition to the Crown of England. This opposition particularly appeared with the questions of Property right, in the declaration of independence, whose Thomas Jefferson was one of the protagonists. This explains the importance of the economy and the Intellectual property in the design of sovereignty that are made the Americans today.

Post-war period and the difficulty of the development of the international relations

The emergence of the concept of limitation of sovereignty

Until the 18th century, the theorists of the Lights were leaning only on the means of limitation of internal sovereignty (royal capacity).

The 20th century saw emerging, following the paroxysm of the Nationalisme S and the Totalitarisme S of (first and second world war in particular) and of the quasi-destruction of the operation of the international company, the idea that it was necessary to limit the Risque S of drift of the legislative systems (see Légicentrisme) and to control the application of the Basic rights in the Constitution S, such as for example in the German Fundamental law of 1949 (see also Constitutionnalisme).

In this respect, the Charter of the United Nations in 1948, which recognizes the principle of sovereignty, corollary of the Principe of non-interference, authorizes however to bring limitations there, but defines the conditions strictly of them. The sanctions decided against a State which would put in danger international peace can be only multilateral. They are generally of economic order (blockade…). The right of interference (and not the owe of interference, in spite of the proposals of the doctrines favorable to a humane intervention), is even more strictly framed and can be implemented only if all the other solutions failed.

In the same order of idea, the theory of the limited Souveraineté was stated in 1968 by the the USSR to justify its intervention in the countries brothers for the defense of the socialist interests; it was badly accepted by the countries brothers having to undergo sovereignty, even if in theory it were limited .

Indirect forms of cultural Influence start to appear, with the requirement of the United States to authorize film projection Hollywood in the French cinemas with the Accords Blum-Byrnes (1946).

Impossibility practices to implement this limitation before the end of the Cold war

One notices that, in practice, one initially tried to limit official sovereignties on the basis of the political field , which was, to various degrees, of the more or less proven failures, partly because national selfishnesses prevailed on very required co-operation.

Thus, the action of UNO was incapacitée until in 1989 (fine of the Cold war), except for some exceptions (wars of the Vietnam and the North Korea).

It is by the economic co-operations , increasingly pushed, that the true transfers of sovereignty took place (even if they remain still partial). The national interests are convergent there, since the co-operation involves real economic gains. The co-operation being done increasingly thorough, and becoming even integration in certain cases (the most convincing remainder the European Union), it flashes back then partly on the field Politique.

Initially conceived like economic international cooperations reinforced to avoid news War S (driving Franco-German of the European Union…), little by little, the systems thus set up become extensive and monopolize part of the sovereignty of the State S. That is due partly to the fact that the States are consequently in quasi the practical incapacity to design their economic policies apart from the International relations (all Economic policy intern is dedicated to the failure if one does not take into account the external Concurrence).

With the 21e century universalization upsets the perception of sovereignty

Since the end of the Cold war in 1989, the Universalization, especially into economic material, transforms the concept of sovereignty by making it more depend exclusively on the States. Sovereignty, by the means of transfers of competence, is attacked more and more, at the same time with the international level, but also at the national and regional level.

The international institutions threaten sovereignty of the States

Limits with sovereignty resulting from the intergovernmental Organizations

The international organizations, intergovernmental, end up developing their clean Compétence S and to be detached from the simple clean will their components, the États-membres.

It is in particular the case of:

  • the United Nations, which since the end of the Cold war, follows a true policy of control of the States, even a policy of interference. However, there can always be no control on the five Large ones (five permanent members of the Safety advice).
  • the World Trade organization, which as of her creation in 1994, did not have any evil to sit its competences as regards International business against the States, in particular against the Western States which were seen obliged to observe the rules of liberalized trade (suppression of protectionism in all its forms). In reaction against this phenomenon, the States often set up protective systems which prove more or less effective. However, such systems are condemned by the World Trade organization, which évertue to set up a liberalized trade, free competition being represented, in the liberal economy, as what makes it possible to reach the most profits for everyone. Moreover, the constraining clause drawn up by article XVI-4 (known as “clause of conformity”) of the agreement instituting OMC, which specifies that
each member will ensure the conformity of his laws, regulations and administrative procedures with its obligations such as they are stated in the agreements appearing as an annexe ,

involve a true loss of official sovereignty, since it constrained the States to be legislated, and this in a way in conformity with the rules of OMC. This system is single with OMC with the international level (although one finds it in the system regional of the European Union); the treaties could only prohibit to legislate in a contrary direction with the definite obligations.

The role of influence of the Governmental organizations

Certain organizations Altermondialiste S develop concepts of sovereignty in fields such as the food one (Food sovereignty).

Nevertheless, even if their real capacity varies from one organization to another, one cannot speak truly about supra-official sovereignty of ONG, since their capacities are especially capacities of influence, and not about constraint. Moreover, certain States (of which the United States) and of the large companies are based on the networks of ONG to develop their influence, through organizations like WBCSD, the international Chamber of commerce or the BASD.

Mondialized private companies

One can wonder which is the reality of the sovereignty of the States when certain groups of companies have more financial means and of influence at the political level, through their Lobbies, that States. Indeed, contrary to the States, they are not subjected to the basic obligations in International law and are brought to make their law, as regards Law the labor especially. Moreover, even if these companies are still not represented on the international scene, certain States (the United States…) their private interests relate to the international scene.

Stakes of universalization for sovereignty

See also: Universalization

See also: economic Universalization

Defense and interior safety

The end of the Cold war, according to some, is to be dated with the Traité nuclear non-proliferation in 1968. The detention of the Nuclear weapon was regarded before as the mark of sovereignty. This design, which since had lost its credibility, is however given to the last style by the current speeches held by the Iran and the North Korea.

The internal security today tends to take the step on the questions of defense against the external attacks, since the citizens must be protected from the interior against terrorism, like showed it the Attentats of September 11th to the the United States, considered as an attack with their sovereignty.

In the United States, defense, kingly Function par excellence, is the subject of the behavior of a register of electronic data (thesaurus).

Human rights

The international community identified the human rights like having to be the subject of a universal protection, and either simply international. However, with the progressive extension of the Human rights (1st generation: civil laws and policies; 2nd generation: economic rights and social; 3rd generation: rights of solidarity; and perhaps one 4th generation of total rights), comes to increase the pressure on the States to make respect these rights (in particular the Environnement, 3rd or 4th generation of rights).

The Principe of non-interference, which is stated in the charter of UNO in particular, is then limited by the authorization to intervene in a country when it is considered that the Human rights are not respected.

Economy

August 1st

The economic power of a State makes today integral part of the mechanism which enables him to sit its sovereignty with the international level.

Even in the economy of immaterial the, characterized by the Delocalization S, one finds the concept of territory, which, for much of experts, remains a component of sovereignty:

  • by the means of the head offices and the centers of studies and research
  • by the Poles of competitiveness for the Research and development.

As regards Internet, the territory results in the numerical concept of Espace. The suffix of the Domain name on two letters is called national code (country code Domain Signal-Level, CcTLD) (.fr, .de…). The Système of domain name is chapeauté by ICANN of Californian right, while at the same time its decisions impose themselves in fact on the States.

Moreover, the immaterial Capital of the State and companies is being entered like Intangible fixed assets, therefore likely to give place to Investissement S as well as the traditional immobilization S known as body (factories, buildings).

There is thus here a slip Sémantique of the sovereignty heard with the political direction towards a sovereignty in a broader direction, concerning the economy of immaterial the (without excluding the policy).

Culture

For much of detractors of the Universalization, this one is equivalent to the Americanization of the thought by the means of the domination of the International organizations, in particular OMC, by the the United States.

If the assumption is admitted that the Culture and the identity of a nation or people belong to the characters of its sovereignty, then the identity attacks, which are a collateral effect of the economic Mondialisation (to have a Consommation of mass, still it is necessary that the products presented correspond the needs of the consumers, therefore that them Culture is equivalent to that of the companies which create the products) also form part of the debate.

In reaction, one notes a reinforcement of the idea of Civilization in the formation of the identities (Fernand Braudel) and of the Représentation S (Georges Duby, Jean Delumeau). Claude Lévi-Strauss had a considerable influence at the 20th century with the development of its thesis on the Multiculturalisme (no Culture being considered, in its eyes, higher than another).

The Francophonie is the means appeared to reinforce the cultural Rayonnement around the French Culture, supported by a Tradition Institutionnelle (French Academy).

Information

One attends today a Guerre of information, even of misinformation.

The considerable development of digital forms of diffusion of the Information in open Source, with the Web, armature of the upheavals which can threaten sovereignties of the States. The needs for data-processing Interopérabilité between organizations working in network raise questions as regards Sécurité of the computer data and protection of the informational Patrimoine of the States (Recherche…).

It proves that the the United States currently have a considerable capacity of Influence, thanks to their Langue and with the means of information circulation which the Web and the networks Internet offer, in the majority of the already described fields: economic, financial, social (environment and human rights), and even cultural.

One of the contemporary characteristics of sovereignty is thus the behavior, on the level of several governments, Registres of metadata, based on the reference frame Dublin Core, which makes it possible to control information circulating in opened source, on the level of the data of description of the Computer's resources (Métadonnée S). The the United States hold of the registers for defense, justice, and other strategic domains.

On the Web, the development of the practices of Division of bookmarks, at social or professional ends, can pose in certain cases of the questions on sovereignty.

European Construction

See also: European Construction

Since the end of the Second world war, the tendency is with the formation of regional economic units (ALENA, Mercosur…).

The European Construction is the example even of this type of formation. It was at certain times in contradiction with the concept of sovereignty, in particular, at the time of the crisis of the chair empties, which ended in the Compromis of Luxembourg (1965 - 1966).

Three pillars

See also: Pillars of the European Union

The policy of the European Union breaks up into three pillars:

  • 1st pillar: the European Communities, the pillar of integration,
  • 2nd pillar: the foreign Politics and of common safety (PESC)
  • 3rd pillar: police and legal penal matter co-operation

The decision-making process differs according to the pillars:

  • On the first pillar, one employs the Community Méthode: the Commission has a Monopole of initiative on the preparation of the relative files to this pillar.
  • On the two other pillars, one employs the intergovernmental Méthode, which is a simple co-operation making it possible the State S to remain fully sovereign, even if today it should be moderated this position since the 3rd pillar joined gradually the first (Convention of Schengen).

Balance between sovereignty, Supranationalité and intergovernmental co-operation

Conceived first of all like an economic cooperation, the European Union became following the Traité of Maastricht a doubled economic integration of a political co-operation. The European commission lays out of the monopoly of Right to take initiatives in the first pillar.

The European Union is today a construction sui generis , an entity in extreme cases of a sovereign Federal state. The two principles which define the reciprocal capacities between the States and the Union are the Principe of subsidiarity and the Principe of proportionality.

The Constitutional council French reaffirms that France is fully sovereign, distinguishing transfers of competence and transfers from sovereignty (see supra , definition).

The European Union has today a share of sovereignty in the first pillar known as of integration, because of strong the Compétence S legislative that the European Community takes in very strategic sectors (energy, environment, chemistry, Agriculture), where 60 to 70% of the new legislative texts are of Community origin . Community competences raise well of traditional kingly functions (see supra ), since the economic exchanges are regulated in the news Monnaie, the Euro.

The difficulties of integration are due in particular to the blur of the Limites of Europe (Euro area, Espace Schengen, European Economic space,…), and with the diversity of the Language S. See:

  • Political linguistics of the Political European Union
  • of Europe

The project of European Constitutional treaty aims to structure and reinforce integration, in particular by conferring on the European Union the legal Personality and by creating a European post of minister of the foreign affairs. The president Jacques Chirac wished, because of the deep modification of the public authorities, the impact on the Public services, and in the spirit of the Constitution of 1958 (article 11), that this project be subjected to a popular referendum. The rejection of this project by the People obère the legitimacy of this treaty.

The Political movements which are opposed to the construction of a Europe integrated, in the name of the sovereignty of the States, are called Souverainiste S.

Theorists

Random links:Virgin Islands | Damian Marley | Oltingen | Regular representation | Michel Bollot