If Polexit will be, and I do not believe it, given the financial burdens the country would have to pay back, time will tell. But who tells us that, on the other hand, it is not the European Union itself that has to witness helplessly a progressive process of internal disintegration capable of calling into question its founding purposes even before its existence?

Certainly, the first very hard blow to the intangibility of the primacy of its Institutional Treaties was inflicted with the usual underhanded tactics of exasperating the conflict, and it is still difficult to understand what practical consequences it will bring with it on the political-institutional level. Probably, despite the great fuss raised, none, but never say never. The Polish Supreme Court, so to speak, has in fact rejected the primacy of Community law over national legislation, arguing and affirming that some articles of the EU Treaty would be incompatible with the national Constitution and that, therefore, Polish law would have supremacy over the law. European. Whether it was the usual unsuccessful attack on Democracy perpetrated by the usual sovereign rightists, or of a subversive act, of the first real subversive act of the pre-constituted Order, basically it matters little when it remains limited to a member, such as the Poland, which probably, precisely from the exit, would have nothing to gain in economic and social terms, placing itself in a position of “conditioned” isolation that would lead it to insignificance.

However, the scope of that sentence is anything but legal as it overwhelms, with the explosive force of its sentence, the already critical relations between Warsaw and Brussels. Meanwhile, because Morawiecki, in March, had filed an appeal against a decision of the Court of Justice which had expressed multiple objections to the method of appointing judges in the National Council of the Polish Judiciary, arguing that Brussels would not have, nor would have the right to interfere with the judicial systems of the Member States. Therefore, because the ruling of the Polish Supreme Court, almost canceling the provisions of Articles 1 and 19 of the Treaty on Union with a proverbial "blow in the sponge", has surprisingly placed a decisive barrier to the principle of so-called "enhanced integration" of the member countries and the principle of supremacy of Community law over domestic law. Finally, because, after all, "whoever is the cause of his illness can only cry himself", and the Union in this sense bears full responsibility for the degeneration of events for never having intervened decisively on the political action Hungary and Poland itself, which have been operating undisturbed for some time in the sense of the progressive erosion of the rule of law, thanks to the membership of the former, of Hungary, of course, to the European People's Party which, for its part, needed Fidesz to establish itself as the first group in Europe without taking into consideration the consequences of that compromise membership. All the more so when it is not possible to disregard certain founding principles: that according to which the sovereignty of the Member States is not absolute as it is limited by the sharing of sovereignty at the European level, through membership of the Union, implemented through voluntary accession to the founding Treaties; and even more so that and by virtue of which, in the specific hypothesis, the Union is careful not to proceed in the direction of modifying the Treaties only to subordinate the European legal order to the Polish national one, whose Parliament, probably , seems to have suffered through that unfortunate sentence a very serious prejudice precisely for having supported a pro-European anti-European propaganda without concrete political follow-up of secessionist consistency.

The circumstance is nothing short of paradoxical if not downright laughable on a purely tactical-political level. Let's be clear though. It is undeniable that, over the years, there have been very numerous episodes of more or less declared so-called "nationalist sovereignty": however, those same episodes have always found their embankment in the affirmation of a European sovereignty asserted by several voices by how many, especially the French and Germans, had, and still have, a greater interest and power within the Union complex. In such a system, even the role of Italy, traditionally Euro-convinced, has nevertheless remained shrouded in a veil of ambiguity, especially when one wants to take into consideration the "sovereign resistance" of the yellow-green axis of government in relation to events related to the European Stability Mechanism, that is to that intergovernmental fund created to safeguard the solvency of the States.

The question, therefore, which seems to appear at the gates of Europe is one and only one, variously articulated: how dangerous can the undermining of sovereignty in its various forms be? It is an obstacle only for the European Union and for what it represents, or it is a prejudicial temptation also for an Italy that does not seem to want to find, to date, an internal balance point useful for managing with awareness and authority also for international relations with the outside world? Europe of States, as De Gaulle cried, or Federal Europe? Has the sovereign political parable reached its peak, or is it on the way to its planned extinction in spite of the backlash of the Polish Court? These are multiple-choice questions, and future forecasts are the result of the "construction" underway within a Europe that, after Merkel, needs to find a new and authoritative leading leader.

However, as far as our Italy is concerned, the forecasts would seem anything but rosy despite the guarantees offered by Mario Draghi, and despite the loyalty all in all manifested to the Europeanist ideal and commitment, since regret continues to persist over time. due to the very limited influence exerted so far in the integration process and in relations with institutions and major European partners. In other words, Italy continues to play a so-called "crutch" role, useful for integrating the "political weight" of France and Germany, but without its own specific autonomy. And it is precisely in this context that sovereignty has been able to find its roots to assert itself as a decisive and decisive response, at least in its intentions, to the Italian political insignificance in the international context. But who really benefits from this reaction response? Certainly not to our beautiful country which, like Poland, in the event of an exit would have everything to lose sight and even considered the internal political instability that certainly cannot be overcome by a mere and occasional Government of National Unity that would like to promise everything but nothing can guarantee. Europe, as such and despite the sovereign front, will continue to outlive itself in order to have no other equally advantageous choice, while Italy, for its part, would seem destined, to the state, to remain relegated to the margins, formally assuming the specific role of the periphery of the Union complex, at least as long as potentially subversive sovereign movements of the Constituted Order continue to persist within it.

Giuseppina Di Salvatore

(Lawyer - Nuoro)

© Riproduzione riservata