Controversial aspects of the EU-Mercosur agreement (a South American perspective)

Fernando Mario Milano (Professor of Integration Law at the National University of Rosario and University of Buenos Aires, Argentina)

With both blocs concluding negotiations on the EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement, it is pertinent to conduct a cursory study on the potential implications of some of the issues linked to the entry into force of its trade pillar, something that, as we will see later, is still far from happening. Of course, this critical analysis should not lead to the interpretation that our position is completely contrary to the provisions of the agreement; it should only serve to highlight those aspects on which there are considerable disagreements between both blocs, which may even render it inapplicable in practice.

As is well known, after 20 years of negotiations, on 28 June 2019, the European Union (“EU”) and Mercosur reached an agreement “in principle” for a “strategic” partnership. This agreement includes not only economic and trade aspects, but also political and cooperation aspects. It consists of three pillars: political dialogue, trade and cooperation.[1]

In view of the disagreements that have arisen between the EU and Mercosur on certain sensitive matters – such as deforestation for agricultural production in the territories of Mercosur countries (particularly in relation to Brazil)[2] – at the request of the EU, an amendment was made to the agreement reached in 2019. In this amendment, in relation to chapter 14 of the trade pillar, a series of parameters to be met for environmental protection were established, in line with the 2015 United Nations (“UN”) Paris Agreement on climate change, duly signed by all Mercosur and EU member countries.[3]

Continue reading “Controversial aspects of the EU-Mercosur agreement (a South American perspective)”

Portugal’s Social Climate Plan: public consultation has begun

Nataly Machado (PhD Candidate at the School of Law of the University of Minho, FCT research scholarship holder – 2023.04074.BD) and Cecília Pires (PhD Candidate at the School of Law of the University of Minho, FCT research scholarship holder – 2023.01072.BD)

As part of the Fit for 55 package –  the set of measures adopted by the European Union (EU) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 and to enable the goal of climate neutrality by 2050 – the EU Emissions Trading System II (ETS2) was created: a new emissions trading system, separate from the existing EU ETS, which will cover and address CO₂ emissions from fuel combustion in buildings, road transport, and additional sectors.[1]

According to calculations by the European Commission, more than 34 million people in the EU are already affected by energy poverty.[2] In 2023, one fifth of the resident population could not afford to keep their home adequately heated. Across the EU, this proportion reached its peak in Portugal and Spain (20.8%). In 2024, the proportion in Portugal decreased to 15.7%, but remained higher among the at-risk-of-poverty population (30.9%) and the elderly population (22%).[3]

Continue reading “Portugal’s Social Climate Plan: public consultation has begun”

Political manipulation in the digital age: the European Union’s struggle for electoral integrity

Beatriz Magalhães Sousa (master’s student in European Union Law at the School of Law of University of Minho)

Modern democracies face, nowadays, highly sophisticated and subtle threats. The electoral interference by third countries, while known to be a practice, has been thrown into the spotlight after the Romanian elections’ debacle – the Constitutional Court, doubting the integrity of the results (which gave the victory to far-right candidate, Calin Georgescu), opted (ex officio)[1] for the annulment of the election. This decision underlines not only the growing suspicion of Russia’s meddling in European politics, but also the dangers that digital technologies and the impoverishment of information constitute for the electoral process – according to the Court, the employment of Artificial Intelligence (AI), automated systems, and coordinated information integrity campaigns play a big part in contemporary elections.[2]

With the elections annulled, Romanian voters rushed to the polls (for the second time in six months) on May 4th, 2025, with the far-right supported candidate – now George Simion, after Georgescu was barred from campaigning for a second time – winning the first round of the rerun.[3] In an attempt to suppress the risks that plagued the past elections, Romania’s institutions created a campaign to combat illegal online content (conducted by the Education Ministry in coordination with the National Audiovisual Council) and encouraged citizens to report any content that constitutes disinformation.[4] These efforts, while commendable seem to have fallen short of the mark with Simion’s win on May 18th being all but certain.

Continue reading “Political manipulation in the digital age: the European Union’s struggle for electoral integrity”

Summaries of judgments: Joined Cases T-830/22 and T-156/23 and Case T-1033/23 Poland v Commission  | Case T-307/22 A2B Connect and Others v Council

Summaries of judgments made in collaboration with the Portuguese judges and référendaire of the General Court (Maria José Costeira, Ricardo Silva Passos and Esperança Mealha)

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition), 5 february 2025

Joined Cases T-830/22 and T-156/23 and Case T-1033/23 Poland v Commission  

Law governing the institutions – Partial failure to comply with an order of the Court of Justice imposing interim measures in the context of an action for failure to fulfil obligations – Periodic penalty payment – Recovery of amounts receivable by offsetting – Article 101(1) and Article 102 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 – Jurisdiction of the General Court

Facts

On 1 April 2021, the European Commission brought an action for failure to fulfil obligations before the Court of Justice against Poland, seeking a declaration that certain legislative amendments to the organisation of the judicial system in Poland, adopted in December 2019, infringed EU law.

In the course of those proceedings, the Court required Poland, inter alia, to suspend the application of certain national provisions challenged by the Commission. Not having implemented that interim measure, Poland was ordered, on 27 October 2021, to pay the Commission a daily penalty payment of one million euro. That daily penalty payment began to run as of 3 November 2021.

Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: Joined Cases T-830/22 and T-156/23 and Case T-1033/23 Poland v Commission  | Case T-307/22 A2B Connect and Others v Council”