Category: Essays

The need for an egalitarian ethical framework for emerging technologies

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 

Manuel Protásio (PhD Candidate at the School of Law of the University of Minho. FCT research scholarship holder – Bolsa UI/BD/152801/2022)
▪           

The blurring boundary between humans and machines introduces a crucial dichotomy between consciousness and information, shaping the dynamics of our technological engagement and the “limbo” between humans and technologies, situated around perception, is central to how the law assesses its potential effects on human behaviour.

According to Kantian philosophy, the act of perception is a private, subjective, and observer-dependent mechanism, which, by its nature, grants the subject a sensation of agency over the physical reality – their environment. This feeling of agency can be understood as the empowering subjective experience that is often translated into the individual’s freedom and autonomy. If it is true that the synthetical perception confers agency over the perceived objects as they are read into our reality, it must also be true that illusions – reasoning mistakes based on our perception – can be triggered if our perception follows systematic errors that occur whenever we store wrong information about our reality regarding perceived objects, or when we use the wrong model of perception to interpret the external world.[1] 

What technologies like Augmented Reality (AR) or Artificial Intelligence (AI) will cause to our perception in the short and long-term is to convey analytical information from the physical world and thus trigger potential changes in our synthetical perception, which can lead to the loss of agency of our own our reality. Virtual Reality (VR), on the other hand, can trigger the same effect by deceiving the synthetical sensory feedback of our biological perception and replicating it through technological means.   

Continue reading “The need for an egalitarian ethical framework for emerging technologies” →

Disinformation overload on social networks: is the European “marketplace of ideas” threatening to collapse

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 

Iolanda Rodrigues de Brito  (PhD, Lecturer at the Ius Gentium  Conimbrigae – Human Rights Centre)
▪           

Disinformation about the Israel-Hamas conflict is flooding social networks, creating an increased risk of escalating the war.[1] Over the past few weeks, the European Commission has rushed to urge social media platforms to comply with the Digital Services Act (DSA), which came into force on 16 November 2022.[2] According to the European Commission, the DSA “sets out an unprecedented new standard for the accountability of online platforms regarding disinformation, illegal content, such as illegal hate speech, and other societal risks” and it “includes overarching principles and robust guarantees for freedom of expression and other users’ rights”.[3] 

On 25 April 2023, the Commission had designated 19 very large online platforms and very large online search engines on the ground of their number of users being above 45 million or 10% of the European Union (EU) population. These services need to comply with the full set of provisions introduced by the DSA since the end of August 2023.[4] Although the new regulation will only be generally applicable from 17 February 2024, its applicability has been anticipated in relation to very large online search engines and very large online platforms, such as social networks (article 92 of the DSA).

Continue reading “Disinformation overload on social networks: is the European “marketplace of ideas” threatening to collapse” →

EU’s policies to AI: are there blindspots regarding accountability and democratic governance?

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 

Maria Inês Costa (PhD Candidate at the School of Law of the University of Minho. FCT research scholarship holder – UI/BD/154522/2023)
▪           

In her recent State of the Union (SOTEU) 2023 speech, the President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen addressed several pressing issues, including artificial intelligence (AI). In this regard, the President of the European Commission highlighted that leading AI creators, academics and experts have issued a warning about AI, stressing that “mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war”, adding that AI is advancing at a faster pace than its creators predicted.[1]

The President of the European Commission also argued that of the three pillars of the global framework for AI – guardrails, governance, and guiding innovation – guardrails is the most important, and in this sense, AI must be developed in a way that is human-centred, transparent, and accountable. Indeed, in Europe we have witnessed such an approach to the development of AI, as evidenced by various official documents and reports from different scientific communities, [2] also emphasising the need to build trust in this type of technology.

Continue reading “EU’s policies to AI: are there blindspots regarding accountability and democratic governance?” →

Why is the demarcation of indigenous peoples’ territories in Brazil important to achieve European and global climate goals?

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 

Cecília Bojarski Pires  (PhD Candidate at the School of Law of the University of Minho)
▪           

Indigenous and tribal peoples’[1] ancestral territories are essential for climate stability and resilience.[2] “Their territories contain about one-third of all the carbon stored in Latin America and the Caribbean forests and 14 percent of the carbon stored in tropical forests worldwide”.[3] It is indisputable that the role played by indigenous peoples is vital in terms of global climate action, but that is not all. This article aims to demonstrate the importance of preserving indigenous peoples’ lands to achieve European and global climate goals, protect the forests and other ecosystems, conserve biodiversity, and prevent climate change. Furthermore, it is a matter of respect for human rights, a European value.

According to Villares,[4] indigenous peoples are united to the land and all its elements. Moreover, the land is not just a tangible material element but a subjective element that takes on a transcendental character. Thus, the territory is occupied and developed by everyone in that community. For that reason, indigenous peoples’ production system is, in general, much less predatory. The consequence of this special way of dealing with the land means that indigenous peoples can use natural resources without putting ecosystems at risk. It makes them indispensable for guaranteeing environmental conservation and contributing to the fight against poverty, hunger, and malnutrition.[5]

Continue reading “Why is the demarcation of indigenous peoples’ territories in Brazil important to achieve European and global climate goals?” →

The Nature Restoration Law in the European Parliament

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 

Isabel Estrada Carvalhais (MEP | Full Member of the Committee of Agriculture and Rural Development and of the Committee of Fisheries | Member of the Group of the Progressive Alliance of the Socialists and Democrats)
▪           

Introduction[1]

This is not an article with academic purposes and even its modest informative and reflective intent is far from complete. Its main aim is to contribute to further information and reflection on a quite important topic presently on top of the European political agenda: the Nature Restoration Law.

I suggest we look at the European Commission’s (EC) proposal for a regulation on the restoration of nature (hereinafter referred to as the Nature Restoration Act or NRL), at the on-going negotiation process in the European Parliament (EP) with recent votes in two associated committees (the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the Committee on Fisheries) and in the EP leading committee (Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety).               

Let us start from the beginning and the beginning is not in the EC proposal itself, but a bit further back, in the conclusions of the European Council of 20 June 2019, immediately after the European elections of 26 May.

The conclusions provided (and still do) a clear preview of the key priorities for action in the European political agenda, as understood by the heads of state and government of the 27 Member States. It is important here to make this reference especially in a social context where we tend to ignore (or are instrumentally led to ignore) the active role that our states and our rulers play in the design of the European project. Chapter III of the conclusions of the European Council[2] reads as follows: “The European Council underlines the importance of the Climate Action Summit that the UN Secretary-General will organise in September 2019 to strengthen global climate action in order to achieve the objective of the Paris Agreement, including by pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, and welcomes the active participation of Member States and the Commission in the preparations.”

Continue reading “The Nature Restoration Law in the European Parliament” →

Once again on the rule of law in Romania. The risk that thousands of defendants would not face criminal liability: a new wave of requests preliminary rulings at the CJEU

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 

Dragoș Călin (Judge at the Bucharest Court of Appeal and Co-President of the Romanian Judges' Forum Association)
▪           

The decisions of the Constitutional Court of Romania once again created a wave of requests for preliminary rulings at the CJEU. Currently there are ten such new referrals that the ordinary courts in Romania (Brașov Court of Appeal, Bucharest Court of Appeal, Bistrița First Instance Court) have submitted or are going to submit after drafting the decisions,[1] under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. In fact, one of the requests (case C-107/23 PPU, Lin) will be heard in an urgent preliminary ruling procedure, therefore, in a very short time, a solution is expected from the CJEU, as the pleadings are scheduled for 10 May 2023. Another reference for a preliminary ruling was dismissed in a peculiar manner, as a result of the admission by the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Criminal Division of the request to transfer the hearing of the case, the High Court noting the fear of a defendant, judged in several cases in which he has such a capacity, regarding the referral to the CJEU.

In the domestic cases in which these requests were submitted, the accused requested the application of the principle of the most favorable criminal law (lex mitior) in the situation where a decision of the Constitutional Court of Romania declared unconstitutional a legal provision (Article 155 par. (1) of the Romanian Criminal Code) regarding the interruption of the limitation period of criminal liability (Decision no. 358/2022). To do so, the Constitutional Court argued the passivity of the legislator, which did not intervene to bring the legal text into agreement with another decision of the Constitutional Court, issued four years earlier (Decision no. 297/2018). During that time the case law of the common courts formed and attempted to interpret the existing in law in accordance with the Constitutional Court’s decision, the practical consequence of reducing to half the limitation period for all criminal acts for which a final judgment of conviction was not issued prior to the first decision of the Constitutional Court and of terminating the criminal proceedings against the accused in question.

Continue reading “Once again on the rule of law in Romania. The risk that thousands of defendants would not face criminal liability: a new wave of requests preliminary rulings at the CJEU” →

From the Digital Services package to the Digital Markets Act: the road to a (more) secure, open, and fundamental rights-friendly digital space

On By officialblogunioIn Essays3 Comments 

Inês Neves (Lecturer at the Faculty of Law, University of Porto | Researcher at CIJ - Centre for Legal Research | Member of the Jean Monnet Module team DigEUCit)
▪           

Aware of the shortcomings arising from the lack of changes to the European Union’s legal framework governing online platforms and digital services, practically since the adoption of the Directive on electronic commerce[1] of 2000, the European Commission presented the Digital services Act package[2] in December 2020. It seeks to ensure and strengthen European digital sovereignty in terms that guarantee fundamental rights and the affirmation of the Union (also on the international stage) as a community of values and rights whose applicability should not depend on the online vs. offline divide. To this end, the options initially pursued, favouring non-interference, minimal regulation,or even the immunisation of intermediaries from any liability, soon proved insufficient to respond to the new digital challenges.

The imperative to provide European citizens and businesses with a secure digital space, respectful of fundamental rights, as well as open, contestable, and fair, is therefore at the origin of a fundamental paradigm shift of increasing responsibility that marks the genetic identity of the digital services package. The vision of a “minimal” European Union is thus replaced by the imposition of a set of obligations on platform service providers, according to a model of ex-ante regulation.

Continue reading “From the Digital Services package to the Digital Markets Act: the road to a (more) secure, open, and fundamental rights-friendly digital space” →

Article 12-A and the presumption of an employment relationship for digital labour platforms

On By officialblogunioIn Essays1 Comment 

Teresa Coelho Moreira (Associate Professor with Aggregation at the Law School of the University of Minho | Integrated member of JusGov )
▪           

Nowadays there is an app for everything or almost everything, from simpler activities, such as food delivery, to more complex ones, such as providing legal services, with new digital platforms emerging every day. Indeed, in theory, any activity can be transformed into a task that can be performed through digital platforms and we witnessed this during the pandemic.

In view of this situation, one of the issues that assumes enormous importance is the qualification of the existing relationships between those who provide the activity in digital platforms, with numerous cases having been already ruled around the world.

Bearing this situation in mind, the importance of establishing presumptions increases. However, the presumption provided for in Article 12 of the Portuguese Labour Code, although positive, was envisaged for typical labour relations, for employment relations in the pre-digital era. Regarding the new ways of providing work, the work in digital platforms, it is necessary to recognize the inadequacy of the presumption of employment to face the emerging problems of the new ways of working through digital platforms. Factors such as, inter alia, the ownership of work equipment and instruments, the existence of a work schedule determined by the beneficiary of the activity and the payment of a certain remuneration, are classic signs of legal subordination, but they are hardly operational signs to address the new types of dependency resulting from the provision of services for a particular company, via platforms.

Continue reading “Article 12-A and the presumption of an employment relationship for digital labour platforms” →

Finally, the ECJ is interpreting Article 22 GDPR (on individual decisions based solely on automated processing, including profiling)

On By officialblogunioIn Essays3 Comments 

Alessandra Silveira (Editor)
▪           

1) What is new about this process? Article 22 GDPR is finally being considered for before the European Court of Justice (ECJ) – and on 16 March 2023, the Advocate General’s Opinion in Case C-634/21 [SCHUFA Holding and Others (Scoring)][1] was published. Article 22 GDPR (apparently) provides a general prohibition of individual decisions based “solely” on automated processing – including profiling – but its provisions raise many doubts to the legal doctrine.[2] Furthermore, Article 22 GDPR is limited to automated decisions that i) produce effects in the legal sphere of the data subject or that ii) significantly affect him/her in a similar manner. The content of the latter provision is not quite clear, but as was suggested by the Data Protection Working Party (WP29), “similar effect” can be interpreted as significantly affecting the circumstances, behaviour or choices of data subjects – for example, decisions affecting a person’s financial situation, including their eligibility for credit.[3] To this extent, the effectiveness of Article 22 GDPR may be very limited until EU case law clarifies i) what a decision taken solely on the basis of automated processing would be, and ii) to what extent this decision produces legal effects or significantly affects the data subject in a similar manner.

2) Why is this case law so relevant? Profiling is an automated processing often used to make predictions about individuals – and may, or may not, lead to automated decisions within the meaning of the Article 22(1) GDPR. It involves collecting information about a person and assessing their characteristics or patterns of behaviour to place them in a particular category or group and to draw on that inference or prediction – whether of their ability to perform a task, their interest or presumed behaviour, etc. To this extent, such automated inferences demand protection as inferred personal data, since they also make it possible to identify someone by association of concepts, characteristics, or contents. The crux of the matter is that people are increasingly losing control over such automated inferences and how they are perceived and evaluated by others. The ECJ has the opportunity to assess the existence of legal remedies to challenge operations which result in automated inferences that are not reasonably justified. As set out below, the approach adopted by the Advocate General has weaknesses – and if the ECJ adopts the conditions suggested by the Advocate General, many reasonable interpretative doubts about Article 22 GDPR will persist.

3) What questions does Article 22 GDPR raise?  Does this Article provide for a right or, rather, a general prohibition whose application does not require the party concerned to actively invoke a right?  What is a decision based “solely” on automated processing? (which apparently excludes “largely” or “partially” but not “exclusively” automated decisions). Will the provisions of Article 22 GRPD only apply where there is no relevant human intervention in the decision-making process? 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]?

Continue reading “Finally, the ECJ is interpreting Article 22 GDPR (on individual decisions based solely on automated processing, including profiling)” →

Union in a time of war: On the Judgment “Violetta Prigozhina”, Case T-212/22

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 
Pedro Madeira Froufe (Editor)
▪           

I

On 8 March 2023, the General Court delivered a judgment in the case of Violetta Prigozhina (Case T-212/22),[1] whose applicant is an octogenarian lady and mother of the well-known Russian “war entrepreneur” who leads the pro-Kremlin mercenary group called the “Wagner Group”.

The European Union (EU) has always had a sufficiently clear and assertive position towards the invasion of Ukraine by the military forces of the Russian Federation, which began on 24 February 2022. Support for Ukraine stems from many factors, not least the Ukrainian people’s desire to move closer to the European way of life. The so-called “Euromaidan revolution” that began in Kiev in 2014 reacted against the former President Víktor Yanukóvytch for having refused to sign the agreements on trade cooperation and, in general, greater openness to the EU, apparently under pressure from Moscow.[2] On the other hand, the military action (aggression) unleashed in 2022 by Russia against Ukraine calls into question the international order and the assumptions of peace built up after the Second World War. From the perspective of the EU (and the political and civilisational bloc currently referred to as the “West”, associated with the framework of the democratic rule of law), this is a serious violation of international law.

Continue reading “Union in a time of war: On the Judgment “Violetta Prigozhina”, Case T-212/22″ →