Editorial of March 2024

By the Alessandra Silveira 

On inferred personal data and the difficulties of EU law in dealing with this matter

The right not to be subject to automated decisions was considered for the first time before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the recent SCHUFA judgment. Article 22 GDPR (on individual decisions based solely on automated processing, including profiling) always raised many doubts to legal scholars:[1] i) what a decision taken “solely” on the basis of automated processing would be?; ii) would this Article provide for a right or, rather, a general prohibition whose application does not require the party concerned to actively invoke a right?; iii) to what extent this automated decision produces legal effects or significantly affects the data subject in a similar manner?; iv) will the provisions of Article 22 GDPR only apply where there is no relevant human intervention in the decision-making process?; v) if a human being examines and weighs other factors when making the final decision, will it not be made “solely” based on the automated processing? [and, in this situation, will the prohibition in Article 22(1) GDPR not apply]?

To these doubts a German court has added a few more. SCHUFA is a private company under German law which provides its contractual partners with information on the creditworthiness of third parties, in particular, consumers. To that end, it establishes a prognosis on the probability of a future behaviour of a person (‘score’), such as the repayment of a loan, based on certain characteristics of that person, on the basis of mathematical and statistical procedures. The establishment of scores (‘scoring’) is based on the assumption that, by assigning a person to a group of other persons with comparable characteristics who have behaved in a certain way, similar behaviour can be predicted.[2]

Continue reading “Editorial of March 2024”

Editorial of February 2024

By the Editorial Team 

The Autumn Eurobarometer and the expectations of European citizens

The Eurobarometer is an instrument used by the institutions of the European Union (EU) to find out and assess the state of European public opinion. Strictly speaking, it is a method of collecting public perceptions, like a survey or poll. Naturally, it focuses on issues and problems that directly concern European integration, but it also covers issues that are relevant from a political, economic, and social point of view. It is a kind of “pulse measuring” of the EU and its citizens. The rigour of the method used, and its credibility make Eurobarometer particularly representative of currents of thought and opinion, with relevance and use in the decision-making and political actions of the EU institutions.

This type of survey – when at all credible, despite the volatility of people’s feelings, emotions, and reactions, which are increasingly moulded by immediacy in the media – is also a factor in good governance. It therefore helps to enliven democracy. It brings the frame of mind of citizens (and therefore voters) closer to political decision-makers. It should be noted that we are increasingly moving towards post-modern democracy – in the sense of post-national, post-State democracy. This means that, with all the (relative) imprecision of the terms now used, democracy and the “popular will” can no longer be circumscribed, imprisoned, reduced to a mere electoral expression, a sporadic vote, preceded by an electoral process (campaign). Furthermore, permanent interaction between elected representatives and voters, as well as an understanding of the people’s messages and way of thinking, are integral factors in a desired democracy and political activity that is sound, transparent and fruitful in terms of satisfying the needs and aspirations of those who are governed. Knowing the reality is fundamental to defining public policies – and the people’s way of feeling and thinking is an inescapable element of that reality.

Continue reading “Editorial of February 2024”

Editorial of January 2024

By Alessandra Silveira (Editor) 

An omen for 2024: the deepening of the European Social Union (in memory of Jacques Delors)

According to the Eurobarometer published in December 2023[1] – six months before the 2024 European Elections –, more than one third of EU citizens see the fight against poverty and social exclusion (36%) and public health (34%) as the main topics the European Parliament (EP) should prioritise. Socio-economic hardships still affect Europeans’ everyday lives: 73% think that their standard of living will decrease over the next year, of which 47% say that they have already witnessed a reduction. Over a third of Europeans (37%) have difficulties paying bills sometimes or most of the time.

This diagnosis is not exactly new. During the sovereign debt crisis, the German sociologist Ulrich Beck suggested the following: if Europeans want to perceive the experience of integration as something that actually makes sense to them, the way forward is more social security through more Europe.[2] And why is that? Because the social dimension of European integration is at the heart of the legitimate concerns that have been expressed by European citizens.

Continue reading “Editorial of January 2024”

Editorial of December 2023

By Alessandra Silveira (Editor) 

Is there a threat to the rule of law in the EU as a consequence of the government agreement in Spain and the institutional crisis in Portugal?

The Government agreement in Spain (the amnesty proposal for the Catalan secession process) and the institutional crisis in Portugal (the resignation of the Government due to signs of influence peddling) have an impact on the functioning of the European Union (EU) because they could jeopardise the value of the rule of law on which the Union is founded (Article 2 TEU).

What is the meaning of the principle (i.e. the legal norm) of the rule of law in the EU? It means that the exercise of power is subject to legal rules and procedures (i.e. legislative, executive, and judicial procedures) that allow citizens to monitor (and possibly challenge) the legitimacy of decisions taken by public authorities. The basic idea of the rule of law is therefore to submit power to the law. This fundamental norm conditions the accession of a candidate State to the EU – and authorises the Union to monitor the proper functioning of the rule of law in the various Member States.

Continue reading “Editorial of December 2023”

Editorial of October 2023

By the Editorial Team 

“Answering the call of history” – on the 2023 “State of the Union” speech (SOTEU) by President Ursula von der Leyen

On 13 September 2023, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, gave a speech summing up her term in office – perhaps even anticipating re-election. To this end, she presented results, arguing that her Commission had managed to implement more than 90 per cent of the political guidelines it presented in 2019.

The motto of the “State of the Union” (SOTEU) 2023 speech was “Answering the call of history”. In what sense? In the sense that history is happening while Russia is waging a full-scale war against the founding principles of the United Nations (UN) Charter. The President of the Commission tried to explain to what extent the European Union (EU) is up to this challenge. But Ursula von de Leyen also demonstrated the extent to which history demands the deepening of the integration process, its “becoming”.

Continue reading “Editorial of October 2023”

Editorial of September 2023

By the Editorial Team 

Impact of climate change on children and young adults

At the end of November 2020, international media[1] reported that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) had ordered 33 European governments to respond to a landmark climate lawsuit lodged by four children and two young adults from Portugal – Duarte Agostinho and Others, no. 39371/20. The media pointed out that this could be the most important case ever tried by the European Court; it is the first occasion the Court has had the opportunity to grapple with climate change and its impact on individuals. The case was filed in September 2020 after Portugal recorded its hottest July in 90 years. It was initiated three years ago following the devasting forest fires in Portugal that killed more than 120 people in 2017. The ECtHR will be holding a hearing for this case on 27 September 2023.

The young applicants are being represented by British barristers, experts in environmental and climate change law, and supported by the London and Dublin based NGO “Global Legal Action Network” (GLAN).[2]  At the request of GLAN, some Editors of UNIO provided a (pro bono) legal opinion for that case concluding that the Portuguese judicial regime is not equipped with a mechanism that allows the prosecution of all the pursued/targeted countries and that any decision issued by a Portuguese court would have limited territorial scope.  

Continue reading “Editorial of September 2023”

Editorial of August 2023

By the Editorial Team 

One year from the European Parliament elections (June 2024): what is the opinion of European citizens (particularly, Portuguese citizens) about European integration?

Before our blog begins its usual summer break, it is important to assess the state of European “democracy in action”. According to the June Eurobarometer results, it could be argued European integration is progressing favourably.[1] Various indicators, such as citizens’ support for democracy, awareness of the upcoming European elections, and the recognition of the impact of the European Union (EU) on citizens’ lives, point to a prevailing sentiment that the EU is a vital lifeline.

To which extent, one might ask? First, Europeans widely recognise the EU’s leading role in responding to the successive crises that have shaped the current European Parliament (EP) legislature. In Portugal, for instance, 80% of respondents (8 out of 10 Portuguese) recognise the impact of the EU on their daily lives, while the European average stands slightly lower at 71%. This aligns with a recent poll conducted in Portugal, according to which Portuguese citizens believe that the EU influences the decisions made by their Government and Parliament, and they not only endorse this influence but also perceive it as positive.

Continue reading “Editorial of August 2023”

Editorial of July 2023

By Alessandra Silveira (Editor) and Maria Inês Costa (PhD candidate, School of Law, University of Minho) 

Regulating Artificial Intelligence (AI): on the civilisational choice we are all making

It is worth highlighting the role of the European Parliament (EP) in taking its stance on the negotiation of the AI Regulation, which in turn aims to regulate the development and use of AI in Europe.[1] With the EP having approved its position, European Institutions may start trilogue negotiations (the Council voted on its position on December 2022). The AI Regulation that will apply across the European Union (EU) will only enter into force if the co-legislators agree on a final wording.

The AI Regulation follows a risk-based approach, i.e., establishes obligations for those who provide and those who use AI systems, according to the level of risk that the application of the AI system entails: is the risk high, is it low, is it minimal? In other words, there is a hierarchisation of risks, and the different levels of risk will correspond to more or less regulation, more or less impositions, more or less restrictions. The EP’s position, even if introducing further safeguards (for example, on generative AI) does not deviate from the idea that the Regulation should protect citizens without jeopardising technological innovation. To this extent, systems with an unacceptable level of risk to people’s safety should be banned, and the EP extended the list of prohibited AI uses under the Commission’s original proposal. These are, for instance, systems used to classify people based on their social behaviour or personal characteristics (such as Chinese-style social control systems); emotion recognition systems in the workplace and educational establishments; predictive policing systems based on profiling or past criminal behaviour; remote and real-time biometric identification systems (such as facial recognition) in publicly accessible spaces, etc.

Continue reading “Editorial of July 2023”

Editorial of June 2023

By Joana Covelo de Abreu (Editor and Key-staff member of CitDig Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence) 

2023 EU Justice Scoreboard – how independent and efficient justice systems can strengthen the business dimension in the EU through digitalisation?

The current European Semester is devoted to sustainable economic growth, within the EU’s annual cycle of economic policy coordination. Insofar, in the 2023 annual sustainable growth survey [COM(2022) 780 final], the European Commission stressed that “[g]ood governance and respect for the rule of law, in particular independent, quality and efficient justice systems […], are key determinants of an economy that works for people” – in fact, there is a “link between effective justice systems and Member States’ business environment” since “[w]ell-functioning and fully independent justice systems can have a positive impact on investment and are key for investment protection, and therefore contribute to productivity and competitiveness”.

Published last June 8th, 2023, the EU Justice Scoreboard [COM(2023) 309 final] acts as a comparative tool to assist the EU and its Member States to understand the justice systems’ state so it can be improved “by providing objective, reliable and comparable data on a number of indicators relevant for the assessment of the efficacy, quality and independence of justice systems in all Member States”.

Continue reading “Editorial of June 2023”

Editorial of May 2023

By Pedro Madeira Froufe (Editor) 

30 years after “Maastricht”: the past and the future of integration (marking Europe’s Day)

1. November 2023 will mark the 30th anniversary of the Treaty on European Union – the Maastricht Treaty. “Maastricht” marks the beginning of a then new era in the integration process which, in a sense, may now be coming to an end. The “post-Maastricht era”, its assumptions and political meaning (guiding European integration), will most likely be different after the war in Ukraine. From this perspective, we can say that European integration has so far had two major phases: an initial phase, a path traced and, at the same time, built, from 1951 (Treaty of Paris, ECSC) to the birth of the European Union (Maastricht Treaty, 1992); and, on the other hand, an era already marked by the existence of the Union, i.e. from 1992/1993 to the present day (a “post-Maastricht” phase). The war in Ukraine heralds the inevitability of a third stage in the integration process which may to some extent redefine (widen?) the very understanding of integration – at least in a political and geostrategic sense. We will most likely be at the dawn of a third phase of “post-war” European integration in Ukraine.

Continue reading “Editorial of May 2023”