Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Preamble

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Treaty on European Union (TEU)

Abstract

His Majesty the King of the Belgians, Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark, the President of the federal Republic of Germany, the President of Ireland, the President of the Hellenic Republic, His Majesty the King of Spain, the President of the French Republic, the President of the Italian Republic, His Royal Highness the Grand Duke of Luxembourg, Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands, the President of the Portuguese Republic, Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The Republic of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Poland, Romania, the Republic of Slovenia, the Slovak Republic, the Republic of Finland, the Kingdom of Sweden and the Republic of Croatia have since become members of the European Union.

  2. 2.

    The numbers attached to the paragraphs of the Preamble, not present in the original version, have been added by the author to facilitate the reading of the comments.

  3. 3.

    See Simon (1995), p. 52–54; Müller-Graff (1993); Fumagalli, in Tizzano (2004), p. 30–31.

  4. 4.

    See Priollaud and Siritzky (2008), p. 25–28; Curti Gialdino (2012); Miliopoulos (2010).

  5. 5.

    In particular, paragraphs 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 13 and 14 have remained unchanged.

  6. 6.

    Reference is being made to paragraphs 8, 9, 11 and 12. The first of this list has undergone minimal change by the Treaty of Lisbon which has introduced the words “and of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union”. Paragraph 9 was introduced in the current formulation of the Amsterdam Treaty, that modified the previous text (the words “taking into account the principle of sustainable development” were added). Also paragraph no. 11 was modified by the Treaty of Amsterdam (the former version more cautiously spoke of the “eventual framing of a common defence policy, which might in time lead to a common defence”). Finally, paragraph 12, already replaced by the Treaty of Amsterdam with a text that was virtually identical to the current text (the Amsterdam version no longer referred to “provisions on justice and home affairs”, but to “an area of freedom, security and justice”), was further modified by the Treaty of Lisbon by adding “and of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union”.

  7. 7.

    See Council of the European Union, Note from General Secretariat of the Council to Delegations, IGC 2007 Mandate, Brussels 26 June 2007, no. 11218/07, POLGEN 74, p. 3, point 6.

  8. 8.

    For the Preamble to the Constitutional Treaty see Amato (2004), Grossi (2004) and Pinelli (2003).

  9. 9.

    See Council of the European Union, Note from General Secretariat of the Council to Delegations, IGC 2007 Mandate, Brussels 26 June 2007, no. 11218/07, POLGEN 74, p. 3, point 3.

  10. 10.

    Amato (2004): “This is a long Preamble, and from this standpoint it is more similar to the Preambles to the Treaties. But its contents are those typical of the preambles to the Constitutions, especially for a feature that we too can easily recognise: the references made to the past are no less pregnant than those made to the future”.

  11. 11.

    See Mirabelli (2006), Schambeck (2006a, b), Weiler (2003), p. 53 et seqq., Varnier (2000), Ferrari (2004), Klecha (2003), Leziroli (2003), Grasso (2004), Dani (2004), Colaianni (2004), Fumagalli Carulli (2005), Starck (2004) and Schmidt (2010). See also Blanke and Mangiameli (2005), p. LIV.

  12. 12.

    The expression has a precedent in the EUCFR. However, it must be pointed out that in the case of the Preamble to the Charter there had been an aporia between the English and the German versions since 2000. Indeed, in the English version there was (and still is) no reference to religious inheritance (“Conscious of its spiritual and moral heritage”), which instead appeared in the German text (“In dem Bewusstsein ihres geistig-religiösen und sittlichen Erbes”). The same divergence appears in the Polish language version; → Art. 55 para 94.

  13. 13.

    See Grossi (2004), p. 437 et seqq.; Cantaro and Magnani (2005).

  14. 14.

    Dogliani (2003); Fioravanti (2004); Grimm (1996), p. 353 et seqq.; Pace (2002); Pernice and Mayer (2003).

  15. 15.

    As in the case of the Constitution of the United States of America, see Davis (1997), p. 49: “The phrase ‘We the people of the United States’, is ambiguous. It was not the people collectively who created the Constitution, but the people of each individual state. The states established the voting requirements for delegates to the ratifying conventions, and the state administered the election machinery. It was a vote of the ratifying conventions of nine states, irrespective of the total popular vote in all states, that was essential for ratification. Whatever the historical case, there has since developed a national community of the people of the United States”.

  16. 16.

    The Preamble to the Constitution of the Reich of 16 April 1871, is certainly similar to the preamble to an international treaty, also for the drafting technique that was used (“Seine Majestät der König von Preußen im Namen des Norddeutschen Bundes, Seine Majestät der König von Bayern, Seine Majestät der König von Württemberg, Seine Königliche Hoheit der Großherzog von Baden und Seine Königliche Hoheit der Großherzog von Hessen und bei Rhein für die südlich vom Main gelegenen Theile des Großherzogtums Hessen, schließen einen ewigen Bund zum Schutze des Bundesgebietes und des innerhalb desselben gültigen Rechtes, sowie zur Pflege der Wohlfahrt des Deutschen Volkes. Dieser Bund wird den Namen Deutsches Reich führen und wird nachstehende Verfassung haben”; emphasis added).

  17. 17.

    According to the indications contained in the Mandate to the delegations (Council of the European Union, Note from General Secretariat of the Council to Delegations, IGC 2007 Mandate, Brussels 26 June 2007, no. 11218/07, POLGEN 74, p. 3, point 4).

  18. 18.

    On this see Curti Gialdino (2004).

  19. 19.

    See Trabucchi (1965); Häberle (1982), p. 211; Kulow (1997).

  20. 20.

    Council of the European Union, Note from the General Secretariat of the Council to the Delegations, IGC 2007 Mandate, Brussels 26 June 2007, no. 11218/07, POLGEN 74, p. 3, point 2.

  21. 21.

    Suffice it to recall, as an example, Art. 1, 3 and 5 TEU-Nice, and also the provisions that albeit referring to the Union were certainly applicable to the Community, for instance Art. 6.

  22. 22.

    On this point see also Pinelli (2010).

  23. 23.

    See Smit and Herzog (2006), § 2.03.

  24. 24.

    See Kulow (1997).

  25. 25.

    See Monaco (1970).

  26. 26.

    See Zuleeg, in von der Groeben et al. (1999), Präambel EUV.

  27. 27.

    See Meyer (2003) and Stern and Tettinger (2006).

  28. 28.

    See CONV 354/02, WG II 16 of 22 October 2002.

  29. 29.

    See CONV 354/02, WG II 16 of 22 October 2002.

  30. 30.

    Häberle (1998), p. 273 et seqq., p. 284.

  31. 31.

    Tettinger (2001), p. 1010.

  32. 32.

    See Case 4451/70, Golder v The United Kingdom (ECtHR 21 February 1975) para 34.

  33. 33.

    See You (1941).

  34. 34.

    Amato (2004): “If several States sit around a table and decide to sign a Treaty with which they intend to regulate their trade relations, in the preamble they will say that there are shortcomings in the current regulations governing the trade relations that they would like to set right, or that they aspire to greater trade freedom because this is what the historic moment or the state of their economies requires. If a constituent assembly is set up, or any other body, with the task of drafting a Constitution, the protagonists of that experience will explain, in the preamble, the reasons for drawing up the constitution, what story they want to close and what story they want to start, and for what purposes. in the preamble. In a nutshell the preamble is a sort of motivation, a text providing indications of the way in which its authors see and experience the circumstances that are leading them to establish new rules among them”.

  35. 35.

    Hallstein (1979); see also Hallstein (1969).

  36. 36.

    German Federal Constitutional Court, 2 BvR 2134/92 et al. (Judgment of 12 October 1993) para 110—Maastricht (in BVerfGE 89, 155 [189]): “As to the question of where a process of European integration will eventually lead after further amendments to the Treaties, the term ‘European Union’ may indicate a concern for further integration, but as regards the intended objective the question is ultimately open. In any event the establishment of a ‘United States of Europe’, in a way comparable to that in which the United States of America became a state, is not at present intended”.

  37. 37.

    See Zuleeg, in von der Groeben et al. (1999), Präambel EUV, who observes: “Weitere Bemühungen um die europäische Einigung sind nicht bloβ möglich, sondern geboten. Zu diesem Zweck können erneut Hoheitsrechte auf die Gemeinschaft oder die Union übertragen werden. Die Entwicklung kann in einen europäischen Bundesstaat einmünden, schlieβt doch eine ‘immer engere Union’ den Übergang zur Staatlichkeit nicht aus”.

  38. 38.

    See Hilf and Terhechte, in Grabitz et al. (2012), Präambel EUV para 8.

  39. 39.

    German Federal Constitutional Court, 2 BvE 2/08 et al. (Judgment of 30 June 2009) para 225–228—Lisbon (in BVerfGE 123, 267 [346–348]).

  40. 40.

    For an examination of the problems of the constitutions see Mangiameli (2001), p. 123 et seqq..

  41. 41.

    See Case 106/77, Simmenthal (ECJ 9 March 1978); Case 11/70, Internationale Handelsgesellschaft (ECJ 17 December 1970).

  42. 42.

    See Mangiameli (2010a).

  43. 43.

    De Witte (2002).

  44. 44.

    Cf. Tajadura Tejada (2003), p. 509, that follows the same reasoning but with regard to the preambles of the constitutions.

  45. 45.

    See Ipsen (1972), p. 101 and p. 211, who emphasises that “die Mitgliedstaaten haben damit als Subjekte des Völkerrechts und als Vertragsstaaten im Sinne des Völkerrechts gehandelt und sind folglich grundsätzlich den allgemeinen Regeln des Völkerrechts unterstellt”.

  46. 46.

    German Federal Constitutional Court, 2 BvR 2134/92 et al. (Judgment of 12 October 1993) para 111—Maastricht; see also para 135: “But the Heads of State or Government meeting in the European Council stressed above all the general view of the member-States that the States themselves would continue to remain the masters of the Treaties and their further development”.

  47. 47.

    German Federal Constitutional Court, 2 BvE 2/08 et al. (Judgment of 30 June 2009) para 231, 332, 340—Lisbon.

  48. 48.

    In this context, however, Art. 48.2 TEU provides that the proposals to revise the Treaties “may, inter alia, serve either to increase or to reduce the competences conferred on the Union in the Treaties”, which may contradict the “ever closer Union”; → Art. 48 para 42 and → Art. 1 para 24.

  49. 49.

    Schmitt (1984), p. 486, 494. Note that the connotation with which Schmitt uses the term “federation” goes beyond the logical underpinnings of the distinction between Confederation of States and Federal States (p. 477) and the teaching appears to be particularly significant on this point, in that it allows to give the right position also to the expression Staatenverbund, used by the federal constitutional Court in the Maastricht judgment.

  50. 50.

    Ipsen (1972), p. 227 et seqq., that continues “Darin läge dann der Beitrag der Gemeinschaftsrechtslehre zur Souveränitätskritik” (p. 233).

  51. 51.

    There the Contracting Parties resolved “to continue the work accomplished within the framework of the Treaties establishing the European Communities and the Treaty on European Union, by ensuring the continuity of the Community acquis”, implicitly recognising the will to consider the integration levels achieved as irreversible.

  52. 52.

    See Mangiameli (2012), p. 120 et seqq.

  53. 53.

    Poland offered the Convention the solution adopted in its own Constitution, whose preamble encompasses all the citizens of the Republic: “Both those who believe in God as a source of truth, justice, good and beauty, and those who do not have that faith, but respect those universal values that come from other sources.”

  54. 54.

    “In dem Bewusstsein ihres geistig-religiösen und sittlichen Erbes gründet sich die Union auf die unteilbaren und universellen Werte”.

  55. 55.

    Amato (2004); on this point see also Mirabelli (2006), p. 133.

  56. 56.

    Blanke (2012a).

  57. 57.

    See the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine of 4 April 1997, signed in Oviedo, that in the preamble declares: “Convinced of the need to respect the human being both as an individual and as a member of the human species and recognising the importance of ensuring the dignity of the human being” (10th paragraph) and “Conscious that the misuse of biology and medicine may lead to acts endangering human dignity” (11th paragraph).

  58. 58.

    In this respect, reference should be made to the recent Joined Cases C-71/11 and C-99/11, Germany v Y & Z (ECJ 5 September 2012), where the Court recognises the status of refugees to two members of the Muslim Ahmadiyya community, for reasons of possible persecution that they could face due to public practice of their religion. The Court affirms: “Freedom of religion is one of the foundations of a democratic society and is a basic human right” (para 57).

  59. 59.

    On religious freedom in the ECHR system see Margiotta Broglio (1967); Belgiorno De Stefano (1989), p. 285 et seqq.; Cannone (1996), p. 264 et seqq.; Morviducci (1988), p. 41 et seqq.

  60. 60.

    See Chabod (1961) and Cattaneo (2008).

  61. 61.

    See Bellini (2006), p. 73–74.

  62. 62.

    See Olivi and Santaniello (2005) and Mammarella and Cacace (2011).

  63. 63.

    Even though it should be recalled that in the early fifties, together with the draft for the establishment of the European Defence Community, a draft treaty establishing the European Political Community was discussed: on this see Bertozzi (2003).

  64. 64.

    On this see, p. 27 et seqq.; see also Everling (1990), p. 81 et seqq.

  65. 65.

    On this point the remarks on the economy, peace and war by Einaudi (1986), appear to be enlightening in the prospect of the European Federation.

  66. 66.

    See Schambeck (2006a), Varnier (2000) and Ferrari (2004).

  67. 67.

    On this point see Häberle (2006); Magnani (2006), p. 481 et seqq.; Cantaro (2006a), p. 507 et seqq.; Di Salvatore (2008a), p. 35 et seqq.

  68. 68.

    See also Art. 167.5 TFEU, that envisage incentive actions for the policies considered, but exclude any harmonisation of the legislative and regulatory provisions of the MS (on this point Mangiameli 2006, p. 72 et seqq.; Grasso 2008, p. 927 et seqq.).

  69. 69.

    In spite of this, the literature tends to make a systematic reconstruction of the religious phenomenon at the European level, see: Margiotta Broglio (2000), p. 87 et seqq.; Ventura (2001); Macrì (2003), p. 67 et seqq.; Ivaldi (2008).

  70. 70.

    On this point see Mangiameli (1997), p. 27 et seqq.; on the various ways in which secularity is intended see Barbera (2007).

  71. 71.

    On this see Durand-Prinborgne (2004) and Haarscher (2008), p. 8 et seqq.

  72. 72.

    See Thierry-Xavier (2005) and also Conseil d’État (2004).

  73. 73.

    On this point see, Dalla Torre (2003).

  74. 74.

    See Stein (2001); on this issue in the drafting of the constitutional treaty see Klecha (2003).

  75. 75.

    See Weiler (2003), p. 53 et seqq.

  76. 76.

    In Osservatore romano of 24 June 2004.

  77. 77.

    See EKD und KEK drängen auf Gottesbezug in der Verfassung, 4. June 2004 (www.ekd.de/presse/pm107_2004_ekd_kek_treffen.html).

  78. 78.

    The president of the Convention himself, Valerie Giscard D’Estaing, had declared several times his intention of introducing an explicit reference to Christianity in the Preamble to the European Constitution, that was not followed up on for lack of consensus. On this point see Leziroli (2003), Grasso (2004), Dani (2004), Colaianni (2004), Fumagalli Carulli (2005) and Starck (2004).

  79. 79.

    Weiler (2003), p. 69.

  80. 80.

    On this point see the observations by Curti Gialdino (2004).

  81. 81.

    See Mirabelli (2006), p. 133 et seqq.

  82. 82.

    See Mirabelli (2006), p. 135.

  83. 83.

    Further considerations in Mangiameli (2010b).

  84. 84.

    See Speer (2003), p. 981; Toggenburg (2003), p. 9 et seqq.; Rensmann (2005), p. 49 et seqq.; Spaemann (2001), p. 172 et seqq.

  85. 85.

    See on the European Social Charter, Jimena Quesada (2006), p. 89–127.

  86. 86.

    See De Schutter (2003), Lucarelli (2003) and Riedel (2003).

  87. 87.

    See The Federalist Papers, No. 84 (May 28, 1788), that warned against the “numerous handles which be given to the doctrine of constructive powers, by the indulgence of an injudicious zeal for bills of rights”.

  88. 88.

    See COM(2001) 428 final of 25 July 2001.

  89. 89.

    See Cantaro (2006a, b).

  90. 90.

    On the policies see the contributions in Mangiameli (2008).

  91. 91.

    See Craig (2010), p. 286–330.

  92. 92.

    See Mangiameli (2012).

  93. 93.

    See Streinz, in Streinz (2012), Präambel EUV para 7; Hilf and Terhechte, in Grabitz et al. (2012), Präambel EUV para 30–32.

  94. 94.

    See Streinz, in Streinz (2012), Präambel EUV para 4.

  95. 95.

    See Lombardi (2006).

  96. 96.

    See Mangiameli (2006), Moscarini (2006) and Scaccia (2006).

  97. 97.

    See Politi (2006).

  98. 98.

    See fn. 6.

  99. 99.

    See, in the sense that the Preamble allows for the justification of the exercise of powers as mentioned in Art. 352 TFEU, Hilf and Terhechte, in Grabitz et al. (2012), Präambel EUV para 14.

  100. 100.

    Quite appropriately the German Constitutional Court, 2BvR 1390/12 (Judgment of 12 September 2012), considered that the monetary union pursuant to the Treaties does not affect the national budgetary autonomy that falls within the direct responsibility and democratic legitimacy of the Parliaments of the MS (para 218). It found also that the national acts of approval (Zustimmungsgesetze) and the accompanying legislation (Begleitgesetzgebung) to the amendment to Art. 136 TFEU and to the ESM Treaty and the Fiscal Compact Treaty are prima facie not in conflict with the Basic law (Grundgesetz), as it creates an international legal regime that does not conflict (para 231, 300), takes into account (para 239) and satisfies (para 280 ) the conditions required by the democratic principle (Art. 38.1 of the Basic Law), the structural principles of the Federal Republic of Germany (Art. 20.1 and 20.2 of the Basic Law) and identity (Art. 79.3 of the Basic Law).

  101. 101.

    See Blanke (2011).

  102. 102.

    See Blanke (2012b), p. 370 et seqq., who makes reference to the economic and legal concept of ordoliberalism. He follows Joerges (2002), 401 et seqq.

  103. 103.

    See Mangiameli and Saputelli (2008) p. 23 and p. 43 et seqq., who consider as “programmatic” the provisions laying down actions for the implementation of the internal market.

  104. 104.

    See Zuleeg, in von der Groeben et al. (1999), Präambel EUV para 11 to 12.

  105. 105.

    See Caruso and De Pasquale (2008), Mangiameli and Saputelli (2008) and Di Salvatore (2008b).

  106. 106.

    See Council of the European Union, 26 June 2006, n. 10917/06, Review of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy (EU SDS)—Renewed Strategy; Communication from the Commission, 3.3.2010, COM (2010) 2020 final, Europe 2020—A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth

  107. 107.

    See Gianfrancesco (2008).

  108. 108.

    See Craig (2010), p. 380 et seqq.; Eeckhout (2012).

  109. 109.

    See Mangiameli (2010b), p. 327 et seqq.

  110. 110.

    See Calvano (2008).

  111. 111.

    See Craig (2010), p. 331 et seqq.

  112. 112.

    See Mangiameli (2008), p. 49 et seqq.

  113. 113.

    See Hilf and Terhechte, in Grabitz et al. (2012), Präambel EUV para 36.

  114. 114.

    See Shaw (2011).

  115. 115.

    See Zuleeg, in von der Groeben et al. (1999), Präambel EUV para 14; Mangiameli (2010a), p. 237.

  116. 116.

    See Frosini (2011) and Tajadura Tejada (2003); the French literature has attributed special prominence to the role of the Preamble to the Constitution of the 4th Republic also for the importance attached to it by the Constitution of the 5th Republic, see Pelloux (1947) and the contributions in Gaudemet (1996).

  117. 117.

    See You (1941); Betti (1956), p. 59–94; Corriente Cordoba (1973); Gounelle (1979).

  118. 118.

    See Hilf and Terhechte, in Grabitz et al. (2012), Präambel EUV para 14.

  119. 119.

    Case 26/62, van Gend & Loos (ECJ 5 February 1963) p. 12: “This view is confirmed by the preamble to the treaty which refers not only to governments but to peoples.” See also Case 56/64, Costen v Commission (Order of 13 July 1966); Case 32/65, Italy v Council and Commission (ECJ 13 July 1966); Case 43/75, Defrenne v SABENA (ECJ 8 April 1976); Case 136/79, National Panasonic v Commission (ECJ 26 June 1980). The AGs often refer to the Preamble.

    In this context special mention must be made of the Opinion 1/76 of the Court on the draft Agreement on the establishment of a European Laying-up Fund for Inland Waterway Vessels (26 April 1977), in which the Preamble to the EEC Treaty was used to declare the illegitimacy of the act, in that it was considered to be “an international agreement the effect of which is also to contribute to the weakening of the institutions of the community and to the surrender of the bases of a common policy and to the undoing of the work of the community is incompatible with the provisions of the treaty”; the Court decided that the agreement was “contrary to a requirement laid down right from the second paragraph of the recitals of the preamble to the treaty, according to which the objectives of the community must be attained by ‘common action’”.

  120. 120.

    Joined Cases C-267/10 and C-268/10, Rossius et Collard v Belgian State – Service public fédéral Finances (Order of 23 May 2011) para 11; see also Case-115/08, ČEZ (ECJ 27 October 2009); Case C-344/08, Rubach (ECJ 16 July 2009); Joined Cases C-378/07 to C-380/07, Angelidaki et al. (ECJ 23 April 2009).

  121. 121.

    See Grossi (2004), p. 437–440, who does not exclude that these contents as well may have prescriptive value, considering their “undeniable interpretational light” (p. 442).

  122. 122.

    See You (1941), p. 82 et seqq.: “Non seulement le préambule indique quel es règles qui le suivent sont ou non des règles générales di droit international, souvent il constate aussi que certaines règles de validité universelle existent, tout en s’abstenant de mentionner où celles-ci se trouvent, ou il contient des règles de ce genre sous forme très explicite” (p. 87).

Table of Cases

  • ECJ 05.02.1963, 26/62, van Gend & Loos, ECR 3 [cit. in para 54]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 13.07.1966, 56/64, Costen v Commission, ECR 429 [cit. in para 54]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 13.07.1966, 32/65, Italy v Council and Commission, ECR 563 [cit. in para 54]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 17.12.1970, 11/70, Internationale Handelsgesellschaft, ECR 1125 [cit. in para 20]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 08.04.1976, 43/75, Defrenne v SABENA, ECR 455 [cit. in para 54]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 26.04.1977, Opinion 1/76, draft Agreement on the establishment of a European Laying-up Fund for Inland Waterway Vessels, ECR 741 [cit. in para 54]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 09.03.1978, 106/77, Simmenthal, ECR 629 [cit. in para 20]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 26.06.1980, 136/79, National Panasonic v Commission, ECR 2033 [cit. in para 54]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 23.04.2009, Joined Cases C-378/07 to C-380/07, Angelidaki et al., ECR I-3071 [cit. in para 54]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 16.07.2009, C-344/08, Rubach, ECR I-7033 [cit. in para 54]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 27.10.2009, C-115/08, ČEZ, ECR I-10265 [cit. in para 54]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 23.05.2011, Joined Cases C-267/10 and C-268/10, Rossius and Collard, nyr [cit. in para 54]

    Google Scholar 

  • ECJ 05.09.2012, Joined Cases C-71/11 and C-99/11, Germany v Y & Z, nyr [cit. in para 32]

    Google Scholar 

References

  • Amato, G. (2004, June). Costituzione europea. Ma a che serve il preambolo? www.astrid-online.it.

  • Barbera, A. (2007). Il cammino della laicità. Forum di Quaderni costituzionali.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belgiorno De Stefano, M. G. (1989). La libertà religiosa nelle sentenze della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo. Quaderni di diritto del lavoro e delle relazioni industriali 285–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellini, P. (2006). Per una sistemazione canonistica delle relazioni tra diritto della Chiesa e diritto dello Stato. Condizioni e limiti di contributo da parte della dottrina statualistica (1954). Cosenza: Pellegrini.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertozzi, S. (2003). La Comunità europea di difesa. Profili storici, istituzionali e giuridici. Turin: Giappichelli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betti, E. (1956). Problematica del Diritto internazionale. Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanke, H.-J. (2011). The European Economic and Monetary Union – Between vulnerability and reform. International Journal of Public Law and Policy, 1(4), 402–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanke, H.-J. (2012a). I simboli religiosi nello spazio pubblico. In F. D’Agostino, & A. C. Amato Mangiameli (Eds.), Diritto e religione. Tra storia e politica (p. 157–195). Rome: Aracne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanke, H.-J. (2012b). The economic constitution of the European Union. In H.-J. Blanke & S. Mangiameli (Eds.), The European Union after Lisbon. Constitutional basis, economic order and external action (p. 369–420). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Blanke, H.-J., & Mangiameli, S. (2005). Introduction. In H.-J. Blanke & S. Mangiameli (Eds.), Governing Europe under a Constitution (p. XXV). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvano, R. (2008). La cooperazione di polizia e giudiziaria in materia penale. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, Vol. III, Le politiche dell’Unione (p. 1095–1127). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannone, A. (1996). Gli orientamenti della giurisprudenza della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo in materia religiosa. Rivista internazionale dei diritti dell’uomo 264–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantaro, A. (2006a). Il rispetto delle funzioni essenziali dello Stato. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, Vol. I, I Principi dell’Unione (p. 507–565). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantaro, A. (2006b). Social rights and European neo-constitutionalism. In H.-J. Blanke, & S. Mangiameli (Eds.), Governing Europe under a constitution (p. 185–232). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantaro, A., & Magnani, C. (2005). L’ambiguo preambolo: atto formalmente internazionalistico, dichiarazione sostanzialmente costituzionale, in Studi sulla Costituzione europea. Quad. di Rass. dir. eu. 51–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caruso, F., & De Pasquale, P. (2008). Mercato comune e Unione economica e monetaria quali strumenti di realizzazione degli obiettivi dell’Unione europea. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol III, Le politiche dell’Unione (p. 1–20). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cattaneo, M. A. (2008). Le radici dell’Europa tra fede e ragione. Naples: ESI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chabod, F. (1961). L’idea di Europa. Bari: Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colaianni, N. (2004). Europa senza radici (cristiane)? Politica del diritto 515–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conseil d’État. (2004). Un siècle de laïcité, Rapport public, Jurisprudence et avis de 2003. Paris: La Documentation française.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corriente Cordoba, J. A. (1973). Valoracion Juridica de los preambulos de los tratados internacionales. Pamplona: Ed. Universidad de Navarra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, P. (2010). The Lisbon Treaty. Oxford: OUP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Curti Gialdino, C. (2004). Unita nella diversità. Brevi considerazioni sul motto dell’Unione europea. Diritto dell’Unione Europea 653–661.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curti Gialdino, C. (2012). Preambolo. In C. Curti Gialdino (Ed.), Codice dell’Unione europea operativa (p. 33–45). Naples: Simone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalla Torre, G. (2003). Europa. Quale Laicità? San Paolo: Cinisello Balsamo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dani, M. (2004). L’importante è non avere paura. Un’Unione europea profana in un’Europa cristiana? Quaderni costituzionali 763–790.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, S. (1997). Corwin and Peltason’s understanding the constitution (14th ed.). Harcourt Brace College Publishers: San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Schutter, O. (2003). La garanzia dei diritti e principi sociali nella “Carta dei diritti Fondamentali”. In G. Zagrebelsky (Ed.), Diritti e Costituzione nell’Unione Europea (p. 192–220). Rome: Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Witte, B. (2002). Il processo semi-permanente di revisione dei trattati. Quaderni costituzionali 499–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Salvatore, E. (2008a). L’identità costituzionale dell’Unione europea e degli Stati membri. Turin: Giappichelli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Salvatore, E. (2008b). La tutela dell’ambiente. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol III, Le politiche dell’Unione (p. 527–555). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dogliani, M. (July 2003). Può la Costituzione europea non essere una Costituzione in senso moderno? www.costituzionalismo.it.

  • Durand-Prinborgne, C. (2004). La Laïcité. Paris: Dalloz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eeckhout, P. (2012). The EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy after Lisbon: Form Pillar Talk to Constitutionalism. In A. Biondi, P. Eeckhout, & S. Ripley (Eds.), EU Law after Lisbon (p. 265–291). Oxford: OUP.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Einaudi, L. (1986). La guerra e l’unità europea. Bologna: Mulino.

    Google Scholar 

  • Everling, U. (1990). Von der Freizügigkeit der Arbeitnehmer zum Europäischen Bürgerrecht? Europarecht 81–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari, S. (2004). Religione, società e diritto in Europa occidentale. In G. B. Varnier (Ed.), Fattore religioso, ordinamenti e identità nazionale nell’Italia che cambia (p. 37–63). Geneva: Accademia ligure di scienze e lettere.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fioravanti, M. (2004). Un ibrido fra “trattato” e “costituzione”. Il Filangieri 207–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frosini, J. O. (2011). Il linguaggio dei preamboli costituzionali. Il linguaggio del diritto costituzionale, Bologna, Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fumagalli Carulli, O. (January 2005). Costituzione europea radici cristiane e Chiese. www.olir.it.

  • Gaudemet, Y. (Ed.). (1996). Le préambule de la Constitution de 1946. Paris: Puf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gianfrancesco, E. (2008). La politica estera e di sicurezza. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol III, Le politiche dell’Unione (p. 1129–1160). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gounelle, M. (1979). La motivation des Actes Juridiques en Droit International Public. Paris: Pedone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabitz, H., Hilf, M., & Nettesheim, M. (Eds.). (2012). Das Recht der Europäischen Union. Loose leaf. Munich: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasso, G. P. (2004). Il richiamo alle “radici cristiane” e il progetto di Costituzione europea. Diritto e società 179–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasso, N. (2008). La politica culturale. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol III, Le politiche dell’Unione (p. 927–970). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm, D. (1996). Una Costituzione per l’Europa? In G. Zagrebelsky, P. P. Portinaio, & J. Luther (Eds.), Il futuro della costituzione (p. 339–368). Turin: Einaudi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossi, P. F. (2004). A proposito del preambolo nella Costituzione dell’Unione europea. Arch. Giur. 435–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haarscher, G. (2008). La Laïcité (4th ed.). Paris: Puf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häberle, P. (1982). Präambel in Text und Kontext von Verfassungen. In J. Listl & H. Schambeck (Eds.), Demokratie in Anfechtung und Bewährung: Festschrift für Johannes Broermann (p. 209–221). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häberle, P. (1998). Verfassungslehre als Kulturwissenschaft (2nd ed.). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häberle, P. (2006). Costituzione e identità culturale, tra Europa e Stati nazionali. Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallstein, W. (1969). Der unvollendete Bundesstaat. Europäische Erfahrungen und Erkenntnisse. Düsseldorf: Econ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallstein, W. (1979). Europäische Reden. Stuttgart: DVA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ipsen, H. P. (1972). Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivaldi, M. C. (2008). Diritto e religione nell’Unione europea. Roma: Ed. La Nuova Cultura.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jimena Quesada, L. (2006). Sistema europeo de Derechos Fundamentales. Madrid: Editorial COLEX.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joerges, C. (2002). Das Recht im Prozess der Konstitutionalisierung Europas. In B. Kohler-Koch & M. Jachtenfuchs (Eds.), Verfassungspolitik in der Europäischen Union (p. 53 et seqq.). Mannheim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klecha, K. (2003). The controversy over including invocatio Dei into the future European Constitution. In A. Bodnar, M. Kowalski, K. Reible, & F. Schorkopf (Eds.), The Emerging Constitutional Law of the European Union. German and Polish Perspectives (p. 551–587). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulow, A.-C. (1997). Inhalte und Funktionen der Präambel des EG-Vetrages. Bayreuth: PCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leziroli, G. (2003). La cristianità obliata della Costituzione europea. Dir. Eccl. I, 1087–1115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombardi, C. (2006). Il principio di prossimità nell’ordinamento europeo. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol I, I principi dell’Unione (p. 377–433). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucarelli, A. (2003). Diritti sociali e principi “costituzionali” europei. In A. Lucarelli, & A. Patroni Griffi (Eds.), Studi sulla Costituzione europea. Percorsi e ipotesi (p. 173–189). Naples: ESI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macrì, G. (2003). Evoluzione ed affermazione del diritto fondamentale di libertà religiosa nell’ambito della “comunità sopranazionale” europea. In G. Macrì (Ed.), La libertà religiosa in Italia, in Europa e negli ordinamenti sopranazionali (p. 67–102). Penta di Fisciano (SA): Gutenberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnani, C. (2006). Il principio dell’identità nazionale nell’ordinamento europeo. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol I, I Principi dell’Unione (p. 481–506). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mammarella, G., & Cacace, P. (2011). Storia e politica dell’Unione europea (5th ed.). Bari/Rome: Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangiameli, S. (1997). La “laicità” dello Stato tra neutralizzazione del fattore religioso e “pluralismo confessionale e culturale”. Diritto e società 27–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangiameli, S. (2001). Die zehn Jahre der Wiedervereinigung und die deutschen und italienischen Verfassungserfahrungen. In K. Stern (Ed.), Deutsche Wiedervereinigung, vol V, Zehn Jahre Deutsche Einheit (p. 123–140). Cologne: Carl Heymanns.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangiameli, S. (2006). La competenza europea, il suo esercizio e l’impatto sugli ordinamenti degli Stati membri. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol II, L’esercizio delle competenze (p. 1–90). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangiameli, S. (Ed.). (2008). L’ordinamento europeo (Le politiche dell’Unione, Vol. III). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangiameli, S. (2010a). Unchangeable core elements of national constitutions and the process of European integration. For a criticism to the theory of the “controlimiti” (counter-limits/Schranken-Schranken). Teoria del diritto e dello Stato 68–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangiameli, S. (2010b). L’identità dell’Europa: laicità e libertà religiosa. In A. C. Amato Mangiameli & M. R. De Simone (Eds.), Diritto e religione tra passato e future (p. 327–348). Rome: Aracne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangiameli, S. (2012). The Institutional Design of the European Union after Lisbon. In H.-J. Blanke & S. Mangiameli (Eds.), The European Union after Lisbon (p. 93–128). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mangiameli, S., & Saputelli, G. (2008). Instaurazione del mercato interno e attuazione delle libertà fondamentali. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol III, Le politiche dell’Unione (p. 21–50). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margiotta Broglio, F. (1967). La protezione internazionale della libertà religiosa nella Convenzione Europea dei Diritti dell’Uomo. Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margiotta Broglio, F. (2000). Il fenomeno religioso nel sistema giuridico dell’Unione europea. In F. Margiotta Broglio, C. Mirabelli, & F. Onida (Eds.), Religione e sistemi giuridici. Introduzione al diritto ecclesiastico comparator (p. 87–246). Bologna: Mulino.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. (2003). Präambel. In J. Meyer (Ed.), Kommentar zur Charta der Grundrechte der Europäischen Union (p. 1–43). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miliopoulos, L. (2010). Die Präambel. In A. Marchetti & C. Demesmay (Eds.), Der Vertrag von Lissabon (p. 35–53). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirabelli, C. (2006). The religious element in the Constitution of Europe. In H.-J. Blanke & S. Mangiameli (Eds.), Governing Europe under a Constitution (p. 133–143). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Monaco, R. (1970). Preambolo. In R. Quadri, R. Monaco, & A. Trabucchi (Eds.), Trattato Istitutivo della Comunità Europea del Carbone e dell’Acciaio. Commentario (p. 30–33). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morviducci, C. (1988). La protezione della libertà religiosa nel sistema del Consiglio d’Europa. In S. Ferrari & T. Scovazzi (Eds.), La tutela della libertà di religione: ordinamento internazionale e normative confessionali (p. 41). Padova: Cedam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscarini, A. (2006). Il principio di sussidiarietà. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol II, L’esercizio delle competenze (p. 153–223). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Graff, P.-C. (1993). Verfassungsordnung der EG/EU. In M. A. Dauses (Ed.), Handbuch des EU-Wirtschaftsrechts. Munich: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olivi, B., & Santaniello, R. (2005). Storia dell’integrazione europea. Bologna: Mulino.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pace, A. (2002). La dichiarazione di Laeken e il processo costituente europeo. RTDP 622–623.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelloux, P. (1947). Le préambule de la Constitution du 27 Octobre 1946. Rev. Droit Publ. 347–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pernice, I., & Mayer, F. (2003). La Costituzione integrata dell’Europa. In G. Zagrebelsky (Ed.), Diritti e Costituzione nell’Unione Europea (p. 43–67). Rome: Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinelli, C. (2003). Il preambolo, i valori, gli obiettivi. In F. Bassanini & G. Tiberi (Eds.), Una costituzione per l’Europa. Dalla Convenzione europea alla Conferenza Intergovernativa (p. 31–36). Bologna: il Mulino.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinelli, C. (2010). Il preambolo, i valori, gli obiettivi. In F. Bassanini & G. Tiberi (Eds.), Le nuove Istituzioni europee. Commento al Trattato di Lisbona (p. 67–74). Bologna: il Mulino.

    Google Scholar 

  • Politi, F. (2006). Il principio di trasparenza. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol II, L’esercizio delle competenze (p. 275–296). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Priollaud, F.-X., & Siritzky, D. (2008). Le Traité de Lisbonne: commentaire, article par article, des nouveaux traités européens (TUE et TFUE). Paris: La documentation Française.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rensmann, T. (2005). Grundwerte im Prozeß der europäischen Konstitutionalisierung. Anmerkungen zur Europäischen Union als Wertegemeinschaft aus juristischer Perspektive. In G. Blumenwitz, G. H. Gornig, & D. Murswiek (Eds.), Die Europäische Union als Wertegemeinschaft (p. 49–71). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riedel, E. (2003). Kapitel IV, Solidarität. In J. Meyer (Ed.), Kommentar zur Charta der Grundrechte der Europäischen Union (p. 323–431). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scaccia, G. (2006). Il principio di proporzionalità. In S. Mangiameli (Ed.), L’ordinamento europeo, vol II, L’esercizio delle competenze (p. 225–274). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schambeck, H. (2006a). Die christlichen Wurzeln in der europäischen Verfassungsidee. In P. J. Tettinger & K. Stern (Eds.), Europäische Grundrechte-Charta (p. 199–205). Munich: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schambeck, H. (2006b). Präambel und Gottbezug. In P. J. Tettinger & K. Stern (Eds.), Europäische Grundrechte-Charta (p. 241–248). Munich: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, J. (2010). Religion, Gott, Verfassung. Der Religions- und Gottesbezug in der Verfassung pluralistischer Gesellschaften. Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, C. (1928/1984). La dottrina della Costituzione (1928) (Italian translation 1984). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, J. (2011). Citizenship: Contrasting dynamics at the interface of integration and constitutionalism. In P. Craig & G. De Bùrca (Eds.), The evolution of EU Law (2nd ed., p. 575–609). Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, D. (1995). Préambule. In V. Constantinesco, R. Kovar, & D. Simon (Eds.), Traité sur l’Union Européenne. Commentarire article par article (p. 52–54). Paris: Economica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smit, H., & Herzog, P. (2006). On The Law of the European Union. Los Angeles: LexisNexis Matthew Bender.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spaemann, R. (2001). Europa – Wertegemeinschaft oder Rechtsordnung. Transit 172–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Speer, B. (2003). Die Europäische Union als Wertegemeinschaft. Die Öffentliche Verwaltung 981–992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starck, C. (2004). Le radici comuni dell’Europa e la loro importanza per l’ordinamento giuridico dell’Unione europea. In A. D’Atena & P. Grossi (Eds.), Tutela dei diritti fondamentali e costituzionalismo multilivello (p. 3–18). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, T. (2001). “Im Bewußtsein seiner Verantwortung vor Gott…” – Christliches Menschenbild und demokratischer Verfassungsstaat. In M. Hilolebrand, M. Brocker, H. Behr (Eds.), Säkularisierung und Resakralisierung in westlichen Gesellschaften: ideengeschichtliche und theoretische Perspektiven (p. 185–201). Wiesbaden: Opladen.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, K., & Tettinger, P. J. (2006). Präambel. In P. J. Tettinger & K. Stern (Eds.), Europäische Grundrechte-Charta (p. 227–240). Munich: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streinz, R. (Ed.). (2012). EUV/AEUV (2nd ed.). Munich: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajadura Tejada, J. (2003). Funzione e valore dei preamboli costituzionali. Quaderni costituzionali 509–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tettinger, P. J. (2001). Die Charta der Grundrechte der Europäischen Union. Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 1010–1014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thierry-Xavier, G. (2005). Premier bilance de la loi sur les signes religieux à l’école. La lettre de la justice administrative (9).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tizzano, A. (Ed.). (2004). Trattati dell’Unione europea e della Comunità europea. Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toggenburg, G. N. (2003). Cultural diversity at the background of the European Debate on values. In F. Palermo & G. N. Toggenburg (Eds.), European Constitutional values and cultural diversity (p. 9–23). Bolzano: EURAC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trabucchi, A. (1965). Preambolo. In R. Quadri, R. Monaco, & A. Trabucchi (Eds.), Trattato Istitutivo della Comunità Economica Europea. Commentario (p. 18–26). Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varnier, G. B. (2000). L’identità religiosa della nuova Europa. Iustitia 573–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ventura, M. (2001). La laicità nell’Unione europea. Diritti, mercati, religion. Turin: Giappichelli.

    Google Scholar 

  • von der Groeben, H., Thiesing, J., & Ehlermann C. D. (Eds.). (1999). Kommentar zum EU/EG-Vertrag (5th ed.). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiler, J. H. H. (2003). Un’Europa cristiana. Un saggio esplorativo. Milan: BUR.

    Google Scholar 

  • You, P. (1941). Le Préambule des Traités Internationaux. Fribourg: Libreairie de l’Université.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty for Economics, Law and Social Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany

    Hermann-Josef Blanke

  2. National Research Council Institute for Regionalism, Federalism and Self-Government, Rome, Italy

    Stelio Mangiameli

Authors
  1. Hermann-Josef Blanke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stelio Mangiameli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty for Economics, Law and Social Sc, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany

    Hermann-Josef Blanke

  2. National Research Council - Institute fo Regionalism, Federalism and Self-Governm, Rome, Italy

    Stelio Mangiameli

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Blanke, HJ., Mangiameli, S. (2013). Preamble. In: Blanke, HJ., Mangiameli, S. (eds) The Treaty on European Union (TEU). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31706-4_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation