New UNIO issue now online

On June 30, 2025July 4, 2025 By officialblogunioIn NewsLeave a comment

By the Editorial Team

The Editorial Board is pleased to announce that a new issue of UNIO – EU Law Journal is now online. Issue 11(1) of UNIO includes contributions from a number of highly regarded academics and young scholars and covers topics such as i) EU’s climate diplomacy in the light of the EU-Mercosur Free Trade Agreement; ii) limitations of legal theory in dealing with informational phenomena and ideal models of Internet regulation; iii) access to the Internet as a central aspect of the exercise of fundamental freedoms and rights; iv) right not to be monitored in an emerging omniotic surveillance society; v) emerging principles from digital constitutionalism in EU law and policy governing digital services (principle of user empowerment, principle of due process, and principle of transparency); vi) who should hold the status of “controller” (of data) in the courts, centred upon the cases of Portugal and Spain; and vi) CJEU’s Mousse judgment, in which the CJEU reaffirmed that data collection must be objectively indispensable for a specified legal basis, rejecting broad interpretations of contractual necessity and legitimate interest.

It is our hope that this new edition will be of relevance to our readers and would also like to remind you that we are accepting submissions at UNIO and also on our blog.

You may find UNIO’s 11(1) issue here.

Editorial of June 2025

On June 23, 2025June 23, 2025 By officialblogunioIn EditorialsLeave a comment

40 years since Portugal joined the European Union
(or about Constante’s refusal to jump, the dog from José Saramago’s “The Stone Raft”)

Pedro Madeira Froufe [Editor of this blog and Coordinator of the Group “Studies in European Union Law” (CEDU), of JUSGOV – Research Centre for Justice and Governance, University of Minho)]

Forty years ago, on 12 June 1985, in the Jerónimos Monastery (Lisbon), the Treaty of Accession of Portugal to the then European Economic Community (EEC) was signed – eight years after Portugal had formally applied for membership. This brings us back to the character named Constante, the dog in the 1986 novel “The Stone Raft” by José Saramago, winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature. In this novel, Saramago develops an allegory: the physical, geographical separation of the Iberian Peninsula from the rest of the European continent. In Saramago’s text, this unusual event with no scientific explanation (the separation of the Peninsula) is an allusion to what the author foresaw/feared would happen as part of the unification of Europe: the Iberian countries would be forgotten, cast aside, “sailing adrift”, unable to identify culturally, socially or economically with the rest of Europe. The dog Constante appears at the very beginning of the narrative, hesitating between Spain and France (“the rest of Europe”) as soon as he feels the first crack, and ends up jumping (opting) for the Peninsula, in the process of separation. We shall return to this character, the dog Constante, later in this text.

To begin with, and to give a brief historical overview of Portugal’s pre-accession phase, it was on 28 March 1977 – just after the so-called PREC (“ongoing revolutionary period”) had run its course and only three years after the “Carnation Revolution” (on 25 April 1974) – that the then Portuguese Foreign Minister, José Medeiros Ferreira, sent a letter formally requesting Portugal’s accession to the EEC. In other words, the Portuguese option for European integration was formally recognised as early as 1977.

It is important to remember that around two years earlier, Greece had applied for membership, favouring the direction of European integration at the time (during the 1970s) towards southern Europe. In a way, Greece’s accession in 1981 also signified a reunion of Europe (then “Community”) with its classical mythology. This mythology is at the origin of its name: Europa (Princess Europa and her abduction by a love-struck Zeus…).

Continue reading →

Protecting fundamental rights through the infringement procedure: Advocate General’s Opinion in CJEU Case C-769/22 “Commission v. Hungary”

On June 16, 2025June 16, 2025 By officialblogunioIn Case notesLeave a comment

Gonçalo Martins de Matos (Master in Judiciary Law by the University of Minho | Member of the Editorial Support of this blog)

There is a very relevant case regarding the defence of fundamental rights being processed at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU): an infringement procedure moved against Hungary by the European Commission on the grounds of breaching Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). It is a relevant case because it is the first case to frame abuses of fundamental rights by Hungarian authorities as an overarching systemic problem, instead of the usual sectorial and solitary breaches. This case might open up the infringement procedure to a valuable role of a fundamental rights protection mechanism,[1] as it has been defended by legal scholars and practitioners. And that role is very important in the context of rule of law backsliding and recent democratic erosion.

Fundamental rights are of elementary importance in the European Union (EU)’s legal order. As a matter of fact, the EU is axiologically based on a set of values common to its Member States, namely respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, enshrined in Article 2 TEU and self-imposed as an objective of the Union itself, according to Article 3(1) TEU. It is this conception of the EU as a community of values that contributes to the construction of the “society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail” referred to in the second part of Article 2 TEU. More than a community of values, the EU creates law to which its legal and institutional framework, its Member States and its citizens are bound, resulting in the notion that the Union submits to the principles that itself created. From this notion we conclude that the EU conceives itself as a Union subjected to the Law, in which the exercise of European public power is linked to EU law. We are in presence of the principle of the rule of law translated into the logic of the EU: the principle of the Union of Law, which functions as a limit to the actions of European institutions and a guarantee of the rights of individuals attributed by European provisions.

Continue reading →

Presentation of the Commentary on the Charter of Fundamental Rights given by Judge Nuno Piçarra, published in the JusGov Research Paper Series in the SSRN

On June 6, 2025 By officialblogunioIn ReviewsLeave a comment

By the Editorial Team

A Commentary of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union was edited under the scientific coordination of Alessandra Silveira, Larissa Araújo Coelho, Maria Inês Costa and Tiago Sérgio Cabral, with the editorial support of JusGov (Research Centre for Justice and Governance) and the School of Law of the University of Minho.

This scientific outcome was presented at the School of Law, by Judge Nuno Piçarra, on the 29^thof November 2024. The intervention of this Judge of the Court of Justice [Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ)] is now published in the JusGov Research Paper Series (access here). The ECJ judge’s presentation is a unique opportunity to understand the importance of this scientific contribution to a thorough understanding of the Charter and its importance in the ECJ’s judicial activity.

Continue reading →

Digitalisation of Justice – feedback is open on the putative Commission’s Communication on a Digital Justice Strategy for 2025-2030

On June 2, 2025June 2, 2025 By officialblogunioIn NewsLeave a comment

Joana Covelo de Abreu (Editor of this blog and Key-staff member of Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence “Digital Citizenship & Technological Sustainability” – CitDig, Erasmus+. Project Assistant of the Jean Monnet Network ENDE)

A feedback period is open from the 26^th of May 2025 to the 23^rd of June 2025 concerning a call for evidence on a future Commission’s Communication establishing a strategy on Digital Justice for the time span of 2025-2030.

A call for evidence can be used when the European Commission exercises its right of initiative, as it is enshrined under Article 17 (1) of the Treaty of the European Union (TEU). Although it is usually mentioned in the context of the legislative procedure – since, for the most part, the European Commission is the institution with an independent power to bring legislative proposals to the equation –, this institution is entrusted with the task of planning, preparing and proposing all adequate initiatives to promote the general interest of the Union.

In this sense, a call for evidence must be used to define the scope of i) “a politically sensitive and/or important new law or policy”; ii) “an evaluation of an existing law or policy”; and iii) “a fitness check of a bundle of related existing laws and/or policies”.[1] A call for evidence aims at describing the problem that is justifying the Commission’s action, its objectives, while outlining “policy options”. In this particular action, no impact assessment is scheduled, especially since the Commission wants to see whether it will, in the last quarter of 2025, adopt a Communication (i.e., a non-legislative act) focusing on a Digital Justice Strategy for 2025-2030 (DigitalJustice@2023).

Continue reading →