In 2005, a number of alarming reports on voter participation, social exclusion and political participation were published by the Electoral Commission in the United Kingdom. One third of the electorate do not feel represented by any of the political parties. Less than one in five votes had any impact on the outcome of elections in 2001 and 2005. In the 2005 election, 39% of registered voters did not vote. The turnout for general elections has declined significantly since 1997, and elected representatives are held in low esteem.

Historical background of the Italian Constitution – Main features – Golden age of constitutional enforcement – Italian political renewal – Fathers and sons – The great reform proposal – The 2006 referendum – The upshot.

Power of state – President as state's and as people's representative – Bicephalism of government – Unity in cabinet – History – Guizot, Chateaubriand – Orleanism – President's arbitration is form of leadership – De Gaulle engaging political responsibility – penal responsibility – Cohabitation – Constitutional amendment and referendum (1962) – President structures parliamentary majority – Weakness of Parliament – Full presidentialization? – Sixth Republic?

Union external action after Constitutional set back – Status under international law – Perspective of democracy and leadership – Pillar structure – Substance and ambition of Union's foreign action.

Social function of sovereignty – Taming sovereignty through compromise strategies – The sharing strategy – The creation of a new unreal bearer of sovereignty – Leaving sovereignty itself untouched but forbidding the use of it – Abolishing the concept – Redefining the concept – Challenges to the Westphalian paradigm of international legal sovereignty – National answers to the challenges put by European integration – A new compromise formula – Neutralizing the sovereignty question.

Habermas's normative vision – Strengths and deficiencies – European Union democracy as solution to global problems – Necessity of developing a European civil society – Normative ideal, functional mechanisms, empirical reexamination – Habermas's criticism of Euro-skeptics – Substance-through-procedure mode of social integration – Adequacy of procedural substance questioned – Empirical limits to Habermasian European Union democracy – ‘Multi-segmented governance’ in the European Union – Supranational redistribution? – Legal integration has not facilitated social integration – Scharpf, Weiler, Joerges, Schmitter – Habermas's Sozialstaat principles jeopardized on Union level – Structural obstacle to coordinated European social welfare policy – European politics will resemble Sektoralstaat – Participation, egalitarianism and accountability

Proportionality review and, in particular, ad hoc judicial balancing of competing rights and interests are probably the most celebrated tools propagated by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and are currently dominant features of the European discourse on rights. This methodology and its discourse, in fact, have gained such widespread popularity that, although the outcome of Convention-based and other fundamental rights claims is often far from certain, the way they will be treated by judges can be predicted with some confidence.

The position of human rights within the European Union legal order has been an issue since the early years of the original European Economic Community. For many years, the development of human rights as general principles of Community law was characterized by dialogue and debate between the Communities' Court of Justice on the one hand, and certain national constitutional courts on the other, as regards the protection of human rights recognized in national constitutions by the Community legal order. But in recent years, there has been a parallel dialogue between the Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights, as regards the Community legal order's protection of the rights guaranteed by the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR).

It is uncommon for a provision of the EC Treaty to remain all but unnoticed for fifty years by both legal literature and the case-law of the European Court of Justice. However, that is what happened to Article 292 EC, which states that ‘Member States undertake not to submit a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Treaty to any method of settlement other than those provided for therein.’ This provision can be taken to mean that if a dispute arises between European Union member states involving Community law, they shall bring the dispute exclusively before the European Court of Justice.