This chapter sets the scene for the volume by introducing the notion of constitutional identity for the purpose of analysis and comparison. The chapter also describes the division of the volume into three parts by explaining what each part will focus on in presenting a picture of constitutional identity in a Europe of multilevel constitutionalism.

This chapter gives a comparative overview of the preceding country studies in this volume, which deal with the relationship between national constitutional identity and EU law. In giving an overview, this chapter first discusses the sources of constitutional identity before turning to the actors involved in interpreting such sources and the methods used. This is followed by a discussion of the content of constitutional identity and how such content could be factually disturbed in one way or another. The chapter concludes by considering the ways in which a Member State can respond to disturbances of its identity and offers some thoughts on the problem of constitutional identity conflicts between the Member States and the EU.

Traditionally, Danish case law, academic literature, and other sources do not refer directly to ‘constitutional identity’. However, this absence of the term constitutional identity does not mean that Denmark has none. What it does mean is that it must be extracted from an interpretation of the Constitution, case law, and other sources. Seen in light of the different models of national separation of power in the EU Member States, this chapter challenges the common assumption that constitutional courts and supreme courts are the definers of national constitutional identity in relation to Article 4(2) TEU. In some Member States, the courts are very active in defining constitutional identity, but in others with strong parliaments and more reluctant courts, this is not the case. In order to secure equality between the Member States, we will have to accept that institutions other than courts can be the definers of constitutional identity, depending on the national model for separation of powers.