Sovereignty constitutes a concept with necessary territorial references. If, on the internal plane, Sovereignty consists in the supremacy of the state legal order on a given territory, at the external level, Sovereignty consists only in the independence of this territorialized legal order, that is, in the concept that internationally it recognizes that state legal order , it is worth saying that State – Nation the right to self determination in that territorial space.
The National Territory constitutes, irreversibly, the basis not only of State Power, but, in a broader and remote sense, of the Power of the Nation – State.
It consists of the geographical and physical basis, including the continental shelf, the adjacent sea and the overlying airspace, which provides the human foundation of the Nation with the conditions to develop its culture – and its institutions – in safe conditions.
The Territory is also the arena on which internal political relations and the essential referential of international relations, whether inter – State or intergovernmental, are processed, whether it is interactions involving organs and organizations belonging to the civil societies of different Nations – State, that is, socio – economic – cultural relations from which political connotations or effects can be derived.
The geographical situation, the dimensions and the form of the Territory of a Nation – State, in its relationship with other Nations – State and, internally, in relation to its human foundation, create a set of stimuli and challenges (stimuli and stimuli geopolitical) that often have repercussions both on the historical alliances and rivalries of the National State and, internally, on the historical form of the state (unitary or compound: federation or confederation) and, as a result, on the internal structure of the spatial distribution of power political: more or less centralization or decentralization of decision-making competence, at the political and / or administrative levels.
Knowledge about the concept of sovereignty is fundamental to understanding the formation of what is defined by State. It was from the Modern State, with the French Revolution, that the concept of sovereignty began to be conceived and, little by little, in a historical evolution, was stoned, arriving as it is today.
In the period known to contemporary generations as the period of Absolutism, sovereignty was conceptualized as a supreme power, but an exclusive, unyielding, unquestioned and unlimited power of the Monarch. This power was ratified by the promiscuity with which the church claimed to be the sovereignty of the monarch, a representation of divine power, called temporal power. Gradually, however, the monarch gradually became independent of the papal power and became truly absolute.
In the historical evolution of the concept of sovereignty, there is the social pact as a determining factor of a new conception of this institute. This is due to the force with the new ideas were unleashed, which gave to the representative power, that is, the political power of the time, an absolute power over its members representing the general will and, in this way, creating a new understanding by sovereignty.
In order to better understand this concept of sovereignty in the present day, there is a need to distinguish state sovereignty and sovereignty in the State.
The first is to point out the pre-eminence of the political group, the State, over other internal and external social groups.
Observing from these definitions, it is believed that maintaining the sovereignty of the present state is directly linked to the state power in imposing its supremacy before organized (internal) crime groups and, with the constant growth of globalization, the imposition of effective international policies, so that it overcomes the State’s respect for the international community, whether social, political, economic, cultural or military (external).
The second, on the other hand, sovereignty in the State, concentrates on the supreme authority of the representative power, in the hierarchy of the organs integral to the Administration and, above all, in the justification of the authority conferred on the holder of the supreme power, not allowing within the society a power greater than yours.
Thus, we have that, even the sovereignty belonging to the own people, the people must submit to sovereignty in the State.