Going back to my article, it proves once again that the Lombardo-Veneto (a sovereign state) Italy joined in violation of the Treaty of 1866, ie the union was realized by dint, ie illegally: technically it is an occupied state. If not enough, the state law n Â° 212 December 2010, Italian law, He has deleted the annexation of 1866 , con effettivitÃ dal gennario 2013. It 'a law natta by the thrust of our appeal of the Council of Europe 2008. Mark it as talking down the letter , and says that "As for the much-vaunted lack of jurisdiction, just it happened that a judge has been asked a question to which he had no jurisdiction (that has nothing to do with the legal membership or otherwise of Lombardy and Veneto to Italy)â€ , but it is also true that if that judge had had the documentation to affirm its jurisdiction, ossia la validitÃ dellâ€™annessione, it would be required to affirm declaring lack of jurisdiction and not the absolute lack of jurisdiction, that is, if he did not do it because he could not.
These aspects therefore make sense, it's a lot, today again, tanto piÃ¹ che la Corte Costituzionale dovrÃ discuterne a marzo 2018 in the context of analysis of Legge.reg. Veneto No. 28 of the 2016. Infatti la Corte Ã¨ stata da me richiesta di valutare la validitÃ non solo della annessione del 1866, but also, of cancellation.
Se non si capisce la sovranitÃ internazionale del Lombardo-Veneto e dei diritti umani dei Veneti, then it falls in article 5 of the Italian Constitution speech, that however does not apply in the context of international law, It is the constitution of a state that claims legal presence in the country without being able to prove, missing the title of annexing the whole of Lombardy in the context of the Lombardo-Veneto autonomous and self-governing as it should be in 1866, and this was certainly not healed from the last internal autonomy referendum 2017. Moreover I have shown in 2007 (ten years ago!) that even the monarchy-republic referendum 1946 (and then the Constituent Assembly of the Republic ) They were not legally valid for failure to vote of the areas of Istria and Dalmatia then under Italian jurisdiction. In short, the article 5 of the Constitution's speech would be valid if you talk about Lombardo-Veneto was meaningless, but instead have it.