By the Editorial Team

The recently released Special Eurobarometer on the Digital Decade 2026 offers an insightful view into the hopes and concerns of European citizens regarding the digital transformation. A large majority of Europeans (73%) believe that the digitalisation of daily public and private services is making their lives easier or much easier. An even wider majority (79%) consider that digital policy should be a high or very high priority for the EU. The EU also gets passing marks on the protection of digital rights, with about 51% of respondents stating that the EU protects their digital rights fairly well (46%) or very well (5%). Satisfaction is, however, not unanimous with a statistically relevant 37% of respondents arguing that the EU does not protect their rights very well (30%) or not well at all (7%).

Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) is a growing presence in the daily lives of Europeans. Currently, 43% are using it at least once a week in their personal life and 39% in their work and studies. Most respondents also report increases in use. Without prejudice, important concerns are still present and to achieve a successful integration of AI in the economy without hindering fundamental rights, they need to be addressed. 78% of citizens consider that AI should be developed in an environmentally friendly way and, in fact, 20% even cite environmental impacts as a key barrier to AI adoption. Privacy and data protection concerns (39%), along with concerns about accuracy and incorrect information (36%) and ethical issues (32%), are the most cited barriers to AI adoption. Labour-related concerns are also very much on top of Europeans’ minds with 28% citing potential job losses due to generative AI and 27% lack of training or skills. Europeans are also largely unwilling to sacrifice safety for AI development, with an overwhelming majority (80%) saying that “the development of AI should be carefully regulated to ensure safety, even if this means that AI developers face some constraints”.

With this in mind, the current issue of UNIO appears to reflect the concerns of EU citizens, including articles on AI, data protection, environmental issues, labour rights, and the rule of law.

The first contribution to this issue of UNIO, by Mafalda Miranda Barbosa – entitled “Forbidden uses of AI and liability” –, addresses the interplay between Article 5 of the AI Act prohibiting certain AI practices that are incompatible with the fundamental values of the EU and liability rules, in particular in what concerns wrongfulness, fault and causation.

Our second contribution, by José Vegar Velho, entitled “European Works Councils: normative evolution and challenges of the new Directive (EU) 2025/2450 of the European Parliament and of the Council”, assesses the interplay between Articles 77 and 78 GDPR, with regard to the right to lodge a complaint and to obtain effective judicial remedy against a supervisory authority, Article 79 regarding the right to obtain effective judicial remedy against a controller or processor with the principle of effective judicial protection, and the right to a fair trial, particularly in what relates to the relationship between the judicial and administrative tracks of the proceedings.

The third contribution, by Ana Cardoso and Simone Minelli Teixeira – “The European Green Deal – a portrait of a “green Europe” in a changing geopolitical landscape” –, aims to assess how changes in the geopolitical landscape affect the implementation of the European Green Deal – which has taken a back seat in recent public discourse –, paying particular attention to the influence of the Omnibus Packages in this context. As the authors explain, although there is a drive to develop policies geared towards competitiveness and to adopt urgent measures, it is imperative that effective policymaking remains consistent with the Union’s values and can be reconciled with its sustainability commitments.

The fourth contribution, a co-authorship by Mônia Clarissa Leal and Camila Lopes Martins entitled “Algorithmic discrimination and the criteria for special protection of structurally discriminated groups: an analysis under the Brazilian General Data Protection Law and the European Union General Data Protection Regulation”, presents an analysis of the relationship between algorithmic discrimination and structural discrimination – with a focus on the treatment of structurally discriminated groups – and how these phenomena are regulated by the Brazilian General Data Protection Law and the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation.

Our fifth contribution, authored by Gonçalo Matos – “Defending the Rule of Law in the European Union: the role of the infringement procedure” –, examines the relevance of the infringement procedure as an effective judicial means of addressing the negative consequences arising from the backsliding of the Rule of Law in the EU. Such an analysis is particularly relevant in light of current developments plaguing Europe – which the author explores –, indicating a rise in the prominence of illiberal political movements within Member States that threaten to undermine the values upon which the Union is founded.

The final contribution, entitled “Generative AI – challenges for trade mark law”, is authored by Maria Miguel Carvalho and, as the title suggests, seeks to examine the regulatory challenges that generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) presents for European trade mark law. Drawing on relevant and recent case law on the subject, particularly in the UK and the US, the author investigates how trade mark legislation was not originally designed to tackle the new reality that GenAI presents for trade mark law, highlighting the importance of reinterpreting existing legislation or even introducing amendments to overcome the legal uncertainty arising from it.