By the Editorial Team 

Dear readers,

Today we share with you material that was provided to us by the FULL-PROOF project, co-funded by the European Union, whose goal is to improve criminal justice procedures by tackling breaches of procedural rights at the early stages of justice processes. The project addresses the practical application of EU procedural rights, including the right to information, the right of access to a lawyer and the right to legal aid.

The infographic shown above was shared by the project in Portuguese, in an effort to cater to our Portuguese-speaking audience, and it states that access to a lawyer must be timely, effective and confidential. Under Directive 2013/48/EU, this right must be guaranteed prior to key procedural stages, in particular before questioning begins. Suspects and accused persons must be informed of these rights, asked whether they wish to speak to a lawyer, and assisted in making such contact. In certain cases, legal aid may be provided free of charge. And why is legal aid important? Firstly, to ensure a clear understanding of the situation; secondly, to enable informed decisions to be made; thirdly, to ensure adequate preparation for questioning; and fourthly, to guarantee the presence of a lawyer during questioning (in accordance with the applicable procedures under national law).

The team also sent us an animation which aims to show how access to a lawyer helps make procedural rights effective in practice. The video can be accessed here. A range of practical and educational resources produced by the project are available for consultation here.

We would like to thank the team for sending us this material and for raising awareness regarding such an important issue, and we strongly recommend that our readers visit the project’s website.

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.

Continue reading “New UNIO issue now online” →

Ana Carolina Ribeiro Alves (master’s student in Administrative Law at the School of Law of the University of Minho)

From 2024 to today: amendment of Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 (European Climate Law)

On 5 March 2026, the Council formally adopted the amended European Climate Law, introducing a binding intermediate climate target for 2040 of 90% of reduction in net greenhouse gas emissions compared to 1990 levels. It entered into force 20 days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, applying directly in all EU countries. This milestone strengthens the EU’s trajectory towards climate neutrality. The present article provides a timeline of key political and legislative events that led to the adoption of this amendment.

Regulation (EU) 2021/1119[1] established the EU’s climate targets for 2030 and 2050, creating the framework known as the European Climate Law. Article 4(3) requires the setting of an intermediate Union-wide climate target for 2040 to provide Member States with predictability and a clear transition pathway.

On 6 February 2024,[2] the Commission published a Communication on the 2040 EU climate target, outlining a path from the agreed 2030 intermediate goal. Informed by the scientific advice of the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change and through a detailed impact assessment, it recommended a 90% net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2040 relative to 1990.

Continue reading “Reinforced pathway to EU climate neutrality: introduction of the 90% target for 2040” →

Sofia Amado (master's student in Administrative Law at the School of Law of the University of Minho)

My Voice, My Choice is the provocative slogan chosen to title one of the largest European Citizens Initiatives to this day, uniting over 300 organisations and countless volunteers and supporters across the European Union. According to the legal addendum accompanying this submission, the goal is to create a mechanism of “financial support to Member States that would be able to perform safe termination of pregnancies, in accordance with their domestic law, for anyone in Europe who still lacks access to safe and legal abortion”,[1] in the format of an opt-in mechanism that is open to Member States on a voluntary basis. After the arduous journey of collecting one million signatures over a year – which involved an impressive marketing strategy that included selling merchandise and giving out stickers –,[2] the initiative passed its first trial by fire on 12 December 2025, receiving majority support in the European Parliament. The second and vital victory was achieved just a few days ago.

When analysing the European Commission’s Communication on this subject,[3] published on 26 February 2026, we can conclude that My Voice, My Choice accomplished its main goal, although not in the way initially envisioned. In accordance with Article 168(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the European Commission affirms that “financial support falls within EU competence but […] only for actions that comply with the legislation of the Member State in which they are carried out, and only for as long as such financing does not (directly or indirectly) undermine the competence of Member States to organise healthcare, including its bioethical choices”.[4]

Continue reading “Sounding the alarm: My Voice, My Choice and the proactive role of civil society in the European Union” →

By the Editorial Team

The Editorial Board is happy to announce that a new issue of the UNIO – EU Law Journal is now online. The 11(2) issue of UNIO includes contributions from various highly respected scholars and young academics and addresses issues such as i) judicial independence and reasons why the CJEU assumes oversight of national judicial power; ii) sharenting and the tension between parental rights and children’s freedom; iii) the EU’s duty to promote sustainable development in the EU’s trade agreements; iv) the creation of a taxonomy of biometric systems; v) the Union’s approach to transatlantic relations, including the latest EU Space Act; vi) the concept of the backsliding of the rule of law, the ways in which it differs from purely structural deficiencies, and effective mechanisms to tackle such phenomenon and, finally, vii) privacy and data protection concerns in the EU, especially in light of the latest changes under the proposal of the Digital Omnibus, with the aim of simplifying compliance.

You may find UNIO’s 11(2) issue here.

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.

By the Editorial Team

The Editorial Board is happy to announce that a new issue of the UNIO – EU Law Journal is now online. Issue 10(2) of UNIO includes contributions from a number of highly esteemed academics and young scholars and covers matters such as i) the EU’s conditionality regulation; ii) an analysis of the new far-right movements; iii) the digitalisation of criminal justice in the EU through eu-LISA cooperation with Eurojust and Europol; iv) the taxation of energy products in the EU for reasons of environmental policy; v) digital constitutionalism; vi) the use of technology for inter-jurisdictional cooperation in the inter-American context; and vi) the pivotal role of digital currencies.

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 10(2) issue here.