José Vegar Velho [Guest Lecturer at the School of Law of the University of Minho | Commissioner at the Portuguese Data Protection Authority (Comissão Nacional de Proteção de Dados – CNPD)]
On the 25th of March 2024, the Portuguese DPA – CNPD – issued a decision to temporarily limit the processing of biometric data relating to the processing operation for the collection of iris, eye, and face data in Portugal, that was being performed by a globally established private company, which, at the time, already had a direct impact on about 300,000 persons in said national territory.[1]
Such data was claimed to be the basis of a universal ID, to be used as proof of personhood and human condition, that is, establishing whether an individual is both human and unique – a digital ID.
This ID was presented as a global digital passport that guarantees people a way to preserve their privacy to authenticate themselves as humans online, in a world where intelligence is no longer a discriminator between people and AI.
Bruno Reynaud Sousa (Professor at School of Law of the University of Minho | JusGov Researcher in Space Law and Policy)
Introduction
During the 18th and 19th centuries, Great Britain’s undisputed dominance of the seas under Pax Britannica not only secured its economic and naval supremacy but also enabled it to export its legal norms worldwide.[1] British admiralty courts and jurists, backed by the Royal Navy’s enforcement power, set precedents in maritime law that other nations gradually adopted.[2] A notable example concerns landmark rulings by British courts in the late 18th century that established principles regarding neutral shipping rights and contraband, influencing international agreements such as the Declaration of Paris of 1856.[3] Indeed, the Declaration of Paris, recognised as the first multilateral law-making treaty, was a compromise in which Britain conceded wider neutral rights in exchange for the abolition of privateering. At the time, as privateering was central to U.S. naval strategy in the event of conflict with the former colonial power, Britain secured a diplomatic victory by pushing for the closure of most global ports to privateers, effectively ending the practice.[4]
In 1898, the Spanish-American War sparked a shift that eventually dethroned the Royal Navy’s supremacy and established the U.S. as the leading maritime power.[5] America’s quick victory and subsequent naval expansion – symbolised by steel battleships and the global cruise of the Great White Fleet[6] – transformed industrial might into blue-water reach and began a decades-long, peaceful transition from British to American dominance.[7]
Beatriz Magalhães Sousa (master’s student in European Union Law at the School of Law of University of Minho)
1. Preliminary considerations
Digital transformation, which initially affected only part of the industrial sectors, now acts as a wondrous influence on global economic development in today’s economy. A new paradigm has emerged, based on the digital economy that is taking shape – the “hyperconnectivity” that characterises this new reality transforms the relation between people and organisations, rendering notions of business models, interactions between companies and the way consumers move in the economy itself feel extremely arcaic.
From the explosion of e-commerce (in 2018, 94% of Portuguese people with Internet access had already made at least one online purchase),[1] we witnessed a democratisation of market’s access, which has paved the way not only for the elimination of geographical boundaries, but also for a certain equality on competition conditions between small enterprises and big corporate machines.[2]
Mariana Coelho (Master's in European Union Law at the School of Law of University of Minho)
1. Preliminary considerations
The rise of new technologies has consistently provided more challenges for human rights and democratic values all over the world. With the widespread use of AI technologies, it has never been easier to create manipulated content, namely of sexual nature. And if deepfakes have shown to be increasingly realistic, the risk is ever growing.
In fact, the last few days have seen the emergence of a new trend on social media websites, such as TikTok and X: mukbang[1] and/or ASMR[2] videos created entirely through AI systems, featuring predominantly women of color, and replicating their mannerisms and accents. In these videos, AI models have even been trying to convince the viewers that they are real people, with most of them being dotted with an unimaginable level of realism. If it is this easy to create seemingly innocent videos, that can blur or even virtually delete the line between real people and AI models, the issue of pornographic deepfakes is, or should at least be, now more than ever, at the center of public discourse, with women’s rights being at risk at levels never before seen.
Digital sexual violence targeting women has been a persistent and widespread concern for several years, and its ongoing prevalence has elevated it to a priority within the EU’s digital policy agenda. From political efforts, legislative action and digital literacy initiatives, the EU has undoubtedly become “the world’s leading tech watchdog”.[3] In face of how quickly violent discourse seems to be spreading through multiple societies, the European Parliament has increased pressure on the Commission and Member States to act more quickly and aggressively on the matter of women’s rights, with Irish Member of Parliament Maria Walsh calling for stricter criminal penalties for those who create and disseminate pornographic deepfakes in December 2024.[4] The MEP called to attention the fact that current legal frameworks that exist in the EU, no matter how revolutionary, have proven to be insufficient to combat malicious uses of technology, that are used to harass, defame and exclude women from public discourse and professional life every day.
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]
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.
Ana Carcau (master’s student in European Union Law at the School of Law of University of Minho)
In early 2025, Greenpeace International initiated legal proceedings before Dutch courts seeking compensation for all the damages and costs suffered from a series of abusive lawsuits filed against it by the US-based fossil fuel pipeline company, Energy Transfer.[1] These lawsuits, strategically designed to intimidate and silence public participation, are what we now widely refer to as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). They exemplify what has been described as “punishment by process”: a way of weaponizing legal systems to suppress dissent rather than to seek justice.[2]
The legal battle between Greenpeace and Energy Transfer is far from recent. It all dates back to 2017, when Energy Transfer began targeting Greenpeace entities in the United States, as well as Greenpeace International, in the aftermath of the 2016 Indigenous-led protests against Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). At the time, Energy Transfer alleged that Greenpeace had orchestrated the protests and sought to hold the organisation liable for damages.[3]
Bruno Saraiva [master’s student in European Union Law and Digital Citizenship & Technological Sustainability (CitDig) scholarship holder]
I.
Henrietta Lacks is a relatively obscure name, but one that is representative of the extraordinary impact an individual can have on human achievements, despite their recognition, in life and after death. Her legacy is one of immortality, a unique form of it: books have been written about her, her story is widely discussed, and her very cells are studied daily. Fragments of her body remain alive and will likely persist as long as modern civilisation endures.
Henrietta Lacks died in 1951, at the age of 31. Her passing would come from an extremely aggressive form of cervical cancer. An African American woman, she was born and laboured on her family’s tobacco farm, until the rising fortunes of post war America carried her to Baltimore where she would pass away, leaving her husband and five children. Neither her nor her loved ones would know the significance of her contribution to humanity. Glimpses would only come decades later, when her children’s lives were disrupted by researchers seeking medical data and tissue samples, while steadfastly refusing to divulge the intention behind their actions. Only in 1975, during a chance dinner conversation, would the Lacks family realise Henrietta’s enduring importance.
Cecília Pires (PhD Candidate at the School of Law of the University of Minho | FCT research scholarship holder – 2023.01072.BD)
In February 2025, the European Commission presented the “Action Plan for Affordable Energy”,[1] a strategy developed within the framework of the “Competitiveness Compass for the European Union (EU)”, which aims to reorient the work of the European Commission over the next five years with a view to reviving economic dynamism in Europe.[2]
With the clear intention of reducing the number of European citizens affected by energy poverty, tackling the near doubling of retail electricity prices for industrial consumers, as well as mitigating the difference in energy prices between the EU and its main competitors[3] – a circumstance that could generate a movement towards deindustrialisation and disinvestment in Europe –, the “Action Plan for Affordable Energy” provides for a series of measures to promote the reduction of energy costs for citizens, businesses, industries and communities across the EU, guaranteeing access to cheap, efficient and clean energy for all Europeans.
The new European energy strategy focuses on four pillars, and the respective actions – materialised in the form of revised directives, new directives, strategies, among other instruments – will be adopted over time, some of which are expected to start immediately.
Juan Gálvez Galisteo (PhD student at the University of Seville, undertaking a research stay at the University of Minho)
I.
27 February 2018. This is the date on which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down its landmark judgment in the “Portuguese Judges” case [Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses v. Tribunal de Contas (ASJP)].[1] Seven years have passed since that crucial judgment in the ongoing process of European integration. Was its importance foreseeable at the time? Could anyone have predicted that it would have such a profound impact on democratic coexistence within the European Union (EU)? What consequences did this judgment have? Does it still have an impact in the current European context? What considerations should be weighed up for the future?
This text aims to analyse these issues, albeit briefly, in order to contribute to and encourage the academic debate on the constitutionalisation of the European Union and the defence of its values, as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), with special attention, for obvious reasons, to the rule of law.
Official Blog of UNIO 