I think the important part you all missed is at the front of the
treaty, at Article 4:
"Italy recognizes the full ownership, exclusive dominion, and
sovereign authority and jurisdiction of the Holy See over the Vatican
as at present constituted, together with all its appurtenances and
endowments..."
"Appurtenances" are smaller things joined to the larger more important
part - i.e. appendages, properties, and yes, could even include
exclaves.
Endowments probably wasn't meant to include detached parts - but
something enhancing the main body.
Paragraphs 14 and thereabouts can cover real property ownership of
buidings, without talking of sovereignty at all, because the Italian
state could have kept real property ownership of a building while
giving the Vatican sovereignty over the land on which it sits. At
that point, Italy would own property in another country; the Vatican
would then have to decide if it wanted to make an agreement with Italy
to make the ground in the exclave on which the building sits into an
extraterritorial area. This is why I think you have to turn to
Articles 1-4 as the more appropriate places to get a legal reading on
this issue.
If you go to my website, I posted there a Vatican exclave map from
Geographical Journal in 1931, that Brendan sent me almost two years
ago. The author writes of "extraterritorial" areas but with specific
plots at Castelgondolfo as being a "dependance". The pope has had
sovereignty over this from prior to the Lateran Treaty (I think even
so far back that it may be the only leftover spec in existence without
break from the Papal States in central Italy, over which the Pope
clearly had sovereignty).
http://exclave.info/current/religiousstates/vatican/vaticanexclaves/ge
ojournalgb1931-vatican.jpg
Regards
LN in DC
--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "shocktm" <andrew@A...> wrote:
> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "gerardkeating" <gerard@o...> wrote:
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., <marcelmiquel@n...> wrote:
> >
> > > I've found the text of the Lateran treaty on the net. It
> clarifies
> > > status of the extraterritorial possessions.The adress is:
> > >
> > > http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/treaty.htm
> > >
> >
> > From a reading of this text, Is the "Papal Palace of Castel
> Gandolfo"
> > and enclave of the Vatican City State ???
>
> The key articles are #3, #13-16.
>
> Article 3 indicates that "Italy recognizes the full ownership,
> exclusive dominion, and sovereign authority and jurisdiction of the
> Holy See over the Vatican". Key words here are sovereign authority.
> This creates the Vatican City State.
>
> Article #13 and #14 reconginize/give ownership of several buildings
> including Castel Gandolfo. Key wording here ownership and the lack
of
> the words sovereign authority.
>
> Article #15 gives extraterritorial to certin buildings. What rights
> extraterritorial has is dictated by international law.
>
> Article #16 exempts the sites from taxation. The fact that a
> sovereign authority owns land does not exempted it from taxes unless
> agreed to like this. It also exempts the sites from all Italian
> juristiction.
>
> This is where the debate can occur, I see that soverignty has not
> been given to the Holy See over these sites but that Italy has given
> all rights to them to the Holy See and has no recorse on the matter
> unless the Holy See says so. Which means that the sites are
sovereign
> parts of the Holy See in all but name. So one could call them
> enclaves or on could not. As soverignty has not been given (even
> though everything else has been given) I would not call them
> enclaves, but that is my opinon.
>
> -Andrew