Sovereignty renewed: the most pressing cultural and legal challenge of tomorrow's Europe

I’m glad to present my contribution to a workshop that is oriented toward a critical and extensive problematization of European cultural and political identity. As a young law scholar interested in E.U. politics and legal issues, and as a European citizen, I feel compelled to take part in the current debate by submitting a brief contribution on the controversial topic of “sovereignty” within the European legal framework. I hope to have the opportunity to interact with a vibrant intellectual environment, and to confront myself with new and possibly culturally diverse prospects that may help to enlarge my outlook on key topics pertaining to the most crucial features of European identity. The concept of “sovereignty” is often neglected, if not cursed, mainly because of its association with the disruptive effects of last-century bloody tragedies and current so-called populist political movements. However, given its quintessential nature for the public law field, it has not ceased to influence legal speculations: the many re-interpretations and re-conceptualizations of the definition of sovereignty could be interpreted as proof of the latter persistence and attractive force. Still, if it is true that “sovereignty” has not irrevocably fallen into the shadows of history, how may it be a relevant legal tool for today’s Europe? The main aim of the present contribution – which might be included in the thematic panel “Legal challenges for Europe in times of crisis” – is to represent a new perspective on the issue. The nowadays constitutional landscape in Europe appears to embody a paradoxical situation that has been deemed as “shared sovereignty”: both the European Union and the Member States claim a portion of sovereignty, related to their treaties-defined competencies. Nevertheless, this notion has been proved problematic. This may be true not only from a purely theoretical point of view but, above all, while confronted with the critical challenges posed by both the internal management of the Union policies and the external or global crises that we are compelled to tackle – wars, financial, healthcare, and climate emergencies. All of the above have dramatically demonstrated the risks that a sovereignty so tiny conceived may bring about. Thus, drawing mainly on Dieter Grimm’s writings, my purpose is to explain how the core meaning of sovereignty – rex superiorem non recognoscens – has not been fundamentally altered over time and how legal debates on that topic might be reframed. It is starting from the traditional concept of sovereignty that may be truly possible to renew the European constitutional structure and rethink a European common legal space in a way more apt to stand up in these times of crises and also more suitable for European legal identity. Eventually, the very concept of “sovereignty” roots are to be found in European history and tradition of political thought. The present challenge might be to pragmatically translate it from national State-centred constitutionalism into European constitutionalism.