> It doesn't matter what Tusk says, Poland will be covered by ACTA when EU ratifies it.
If EU ratifies ACTA, but Poland not, "only" the part of ACTA that is under EU competentions will be binding ("only", because that's like 90% of the whole treaty).
But it is debatable if Poland has even the possibility to never ratify a signed treaty.
Also - any new law has to be compatible with signed international treatis, even if these treaties are not ratified).
>any new law has to be compatible with signed international treatis
If that is so, then how would Poland withdraw from a treaty that it has entered? In the U.S., the government can withdraw from a treaty simply by passing a law doing so. Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957) ("when a statute which is subsequent in time is inconsistent with a treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict renders the treaty null").
If I understand correctly, we can withdraw from the whole treaty. But until it remains signed, even before ratifying it, we can't create law that is not compatible with it.
But IANAL, just have read about ACTA etc recently, mostly on Vagla blog.
If EU ratifies ACTA, but Poland not, "only" the part of ACTA that is under EU competentions will be binding ("only", because that's like 90% of the whole treaty).
But it is debatable if Poland has even the possibility to never ratify a signed treaty.
Also - any new law has to be compatible with signed international treatis, even if these treaties are not ratified).