The development of democratic constitutionalism in Portugal in the last (almost) fifty years has been marked by some important debates, which still influence different views and interpretations of the Constitution. I would like to highlight two of them: first, a discussion of the nature and limits of the ‘constitutional project’ enshrined in the CP, the normative strength of the constitution and the margin of appreciation given to the democratic legislator. Second, the debate about constitutional openness, European integration and the constitutional consequences of the overwhelmingly desired ‘European path’ of the country, which evolved more recently to be a reflexion on the contradictions between such a path and national constitutional characteristics, especially during and after the euro crisis. The objective of this work will be to reflect on the constitutional imaginary of democratic Portugal, in particular on the discrepancies between national constitutional aspirations and European integration, which are particularly acute in what regards the so-called social question (i.e., the social project, including social rights as limits to the legislator, and views of the political economy that are strikingly different at the national and EU levels).

This chapter introduces the whole volume, explaining the concept of constitutional imaginary, based on previous work, and also the book’s key aim: to ‘turn the tables’ between the ‘old’ and post-communist Europe, letting the latter speak for itself and define the terms of the debate between the two. The three themes emerging from post-communist Europe are presented: first, how the nature of statehood transforms when the state integrates into a supranational structure and how the imagined ‘other’ (e.g., the enemy, the Soviet Union or even Europe) influences the key concepts of national constitutional law, such as sovereignty, peoplehood or citizenship; second, the uses and misuses of history in the construction of constitutional imaginary; finally, third, there have been varieties of liberalism at play in the period of post-communist transformation (the ‘end of history’, from the perspective of the West). These need to be analysed separately, before the hegemonic ‘liberal ideology’ can be criticized. The greatest hope for this volume is that it will provoke further reflections and debates in both the West and East and that the latter will not only mirror the West, but becomes a true partner in the debate on the shape and future of Europe.

This chapter aims to analyse the Polish ‘integration clause’: Article 90 of the Constitution as an element of the Polish constitutional imaginary. The notion of constitutional imaginary as formulated by Martin Loughlin will provide the theoretical framework for these considerations. Perceived through the lens of Louglin’s constitutional imaginary concept, Article 90 turns out to be the provision that shapes intricate relations of two big ineffable ideas: sovereignty and European integration. The latter has been perceived in the constitutional practice as both the ineffable aspiration and the object of serious concerns. Since Poland’s accession to the EU, for a long time, constitutional practice with regard to the EU was a syncretic collection of cautious friendliness towards EU law, emphasis on (formal) constitutional supremacy and narrowing down the interpretation of ‘the conferral of competences’. Nevertheless, until recently, the constitutional text had tended to be interpreted as facilitating rather than limiting Poland’s participation in European integration. Therefore, the recent Eurosceptic turn after 2015 was not justified either in the sphere of thought or in the constitutional text. It disturbed the existing balance between ideology and utopia.

This penultimate chapter shows how the story of the constitution is not only told by the written text of a constitution but (even predominantly so) by symbols, images, icons, gestures, behaviour, flags, rituals and so on. The constitutional story is conveyed directly and indirectly in very many (unstudied) ways.