Two contradictory judgments concerning Italian sovereignty over Trieste
Opposite thesis between the Court of Trieste and the Council of State
Trieste, march 20th 2014. – On March 19th the Court of Trieste and the Council of State have emitted contradictory orders concerning the issue of the subsistence or not of the Italian sovereignty on Trieste.
The heart of the issue lies in the fact that the United nations had proclaimed Trieste an independent State in 1947, as Free Territory of Trieste (Territorio Libero di Trieste) and international Free Port with resolution n. 16/1947 of the Security Council, as well as with the Treaty of Peace of February 10th, 1947 (article 21, Annexes from VI to X and article 85).
For these reasons, Movimento Trieste Libera objects the very existence of the sovereignty of the Italian State on both the city and the port, sustaining the Italian Government only has a special, temporary international trusteeship agreement obtained in execution of the Treaty of Peace through the specific Memorandum of understanding of London of 1954.
The local Italian judiciary authorities, whose jurisdiction was objected because of that, up to now had reacted affirming said Memorandum would have, on the contrary, instituted Italian sovereignty over Trieste. This thesis has been especially supported by the TAR (Administrative Courthouse of the Region) Friuli Venezia Giulia in judgment n. 530/2013, impugned by the Movimento in front of the Council of State: the impugning received the support of 50 citizens, objecting the TAR’s procedure is based on mere politics, meaning it is anti-juridical.
On march 19th in front of the Court of Trieste, justice doctor Piero Leanza has reverted the TAR’s thesis, affirming, in his order, that Trieste has actually been under trusteeship administration of the Italian Government until 1977, then, the bilateral, Italian-Yugoslav Treaty of Osimo would have affirmed the sovereignty of the Italian State.
The Movimento Trieste Libera does not share this thesis about Osimo, but it notices that said decision would confirm – anyways – the illegitimacy of all these legal procedures applied in Trieste by the Italian authorities from 1954 to 1977, as these were grounded on a merely simulated sovereignty.
On the contrary, the very same day, in Rome, the Conuncil of State has declared inadmissible the appeal of Trieste Libera for procedural reasons, but it did discuss the merit as well, confirming the thesis of the TAR affirming Italian sovereignty subsisting since 1954 is grounded. Trieste Libera intends to impugn this judgment in both Cassazione [Court of Cassation] and in front of the international Courts of Justice.
For said reasons, the Movimento Trieste Libera considers positive both judgments, and it affirms their mutual contradictions could proof at least the uncertainty of the Italian institutions concerning the juridical, international status of both Trieste and its citizens.