Rule of law and democratic performance from an EU perspective: isn’t it time to #TakeDemocracySeriously?

Ana Filipa Ribeiro (LL.M. candidate in European Union Law at the School of Law of the University of Minho)

1. Preliminary considerations

Since 2020, the European Commission has been publishing the rule of law report, which aims to examine the latest developments regarding the rule of law in all Member States and this year marks the first report under the Commission’s new mandate.[1]  According to the European Commission itself, Europe’s rule of law report and yearly rule of law cycle strengthen the EU’s democratic resilience, security, and economy at a time when fundamental rights and democratic institutions face growing pressure worldwide.[2] But how do young people evaluate the state of democracy across Europe? What insights are emerging from the newest generation of European scholars and professionals?

That is precisely what the “Our Rule of Law Foundation” (ORoL) set out to explore. This organisation, with this goal in mind and on a “mission (…) to inform youth about the dangers of democratic backsliding through education and engagement, in order to achieve our goal of fostering a pan-European community of students active in the field of the rule of law in the EU”,[3] issued a call for applications and selected young people across Europe to join a project examining the state of democracy on the continent.

Continue reading “Rule of law and democratic performance from an EU perspective: isn’t it time to #TakeDemocracySeriously?”

Making fast fashion out of fashion

Beatriz da Silva Pereira (master’s in European Union Law at the School of Law of University of Minho)

“Make fast fashion out of fashion” is the most recent slogan adopted by the European Commission to promote its new campaign to engage the Europeans in the battle against fast fashion and to raise public awareness about the EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles.[1]

The EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles arises within the scope of the much-quoted European Green Deal[2] launched in 2018, which marks the beginning of a new age in the environment protection across the EU and imposes a new perspective on the old principle of sustainability, which requires that all political and economic measures undertaken by the EU must consider the impacts and effects that those policies may have on the long run: on the economy, society and the climate.

This means that any initiative taken in order to satisfy a current need of the Europeans must be long-sighted and take in consideration the potential effect it may cause on the economic wealth of the Europeans, ideally resulting in economic growth, increasing monetary resources, in social peace, addressing inequalities, fostering the feeling of belonging and promoting an overall wellbeing to each and every individual, as well as a conscious impact on the environment, preserving ecosystems,  and repairing the damage already caused.

Continue reading “Making fast fashion out of fashion”

EU digital governance – what money (alone) cannot buy

Bruno Saraiva [master’s student in European Union Law and Digital Citizenship & Technological Sustainability (CitDig) scholarship holder]

The stakes have never been higher. They could not have been lower. In today’s world, competition is no longer a byproduct of cohabitation but the very condition of survival – economic, diplomatic, military. And the arena of this competition is digital: data, computing, and the capacity to summon and shape the world’s resources at near-instant speed.[1] This is the new frontier of sovereignty and power. Against this backdrop, the European Union (EU) has wagered that funding, infrastructure, and regulation together – not raw scale alone – will secure its place in the digital age.

Funding as foundation

One must give credit where credit is due: the EU’s AI innovation package reflects a cohesive, participatory and integration-oriented approach. But it could always be more comprehensive. Going beyond mere funding and regulatory flexibility, it offers a coherent, structured approach that emphasises not only technological development but also the education and empowerment of potential users regardless of background – a crucial wellspring of transformation. The further technological advancement diffuses outwards from academic institutions and research centres into society, the greater their potential to generate transformative difference. This is because such fusion entails engagement with a wide range of issues, modes of thought, toolsets and problem-solving strategies, fostering a reflexive process that enriches both innovation and governance.[2] In this sense, diversity of contact and application operates as an engine of innovation, particularly when viewed through the lens of long-term economic development.

Continue reading “EU digital governance – what money (alone) cannot buy”

Looking identity in the eye: brief considerations on the frontiers of biometric data and identity

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.

Continue reading “Looking identity in the eye: brief considerations on the frontiers of biometric data and identity”

The Brussels Effect in orbit: can the EU Space Act reshape global space governance in an American-led era?

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]

Continue reading “The Brussels Effect in orbit: can the EU Space Act reshape global space governance in an American-led era?”

The new VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) package: changes and challenges in the EU tax system

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]

Continue reading “The new VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) package: changes and challenges in the EU tax system”

Editorial of September 2025

Brief notes on the State of the Union (SOTEU) annual address of 10 September 2025

Pedro Madeira Froufe [Editor of this blog and Coordinator of the Group “Studies in European Union Law” (CEDU), of JUSGOV – Research Centre for Justice and Governance, University of Minho)]

On the same day that the President of the Commission delivered her 2025 State of the Union address[1] to the European Parliament, [2] Polish airspace was violated by a group of Russian drones. One of the concerns raised by President von der Leyen was therefore the urgent need to rethink and strengthen the common security and defence policy. In other words, on the very day that the State of the Union address was delivered in the European Parliament, Putin helped to corroborate one of the priorities set out in President von der Leyen’s speech! Moreover, these were the opening words of the speech, in a diagnosis that the President herself described as bleak: “Europe is in a fight. A fight for a continent that is whole and at peace. For a free and independent Europe. A fight for our values and our democracies. A fight for our liberty and our ability to determine our destiny for ourselves. Make no mistake – this is a fight for our future.”

Continue reading “Editorial of September 2025”

Holiday break

By the Editorial Board

Dear readers,

We will be taking a short break for summer holidays. We will resume our regular publishing schedule in early September 2025.

In the meantime, we are always open to receiving new academic contributions from our readers. If you have an innovative, dynamic, thoughtful piece that you believe would fit in this blog, feel free to send it to us at: unio.cedu@direito.uminho.pt.

If you would like to catch up on some reading on EU matters please check our news, commentsessaysreviews, and case law of the ECJ sections. Do not forget to subscribe to the blog by filling your email on the “FOLLOW THE OFFICIAL BLOG OF UNIO” section in the sidebar so you can be updated on all our latest posts.


Picture credit: by Ákos Szabó on pexels.com.

Bronner lives! (On the role played by Bronner and its essential facilities doctrine on recent competition law affairs)

Beatriz Magalhães Sousa (master’s student in European Union Law at the School of Law of University of Minho)

On 10 July 2025, Advocate General Laila Medina delivered her opinion on the LUKOIL Bulgaria EOOD and LUKOIL Neftohim Burgas AD v. Komisia za zashtita na konkurentsiata (Competition Protection Commission) case (C-245/24).[1] This opinion comes at a time where questions run wild about the role played by Bronner and its essential facilities doctrine on recent competition law affairs – a direct effect of the outcome of the AndroidAuto case (C-233/23),[2] on 25 February 2025.

1. Bronner and the essential facilities doctrine

    Founded on Section 1 of the Sherman Act 1890,[3] the essential facilities doctrine gained traction in United States v. Terminal Railroad Association. In that case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Association’s control over the sole viable way of crossing the Mississippi River, aligned with the geographical impossibility of building an alternative, rendered the refusal of access to that channel illegal under antitrust law.[4] This defined essential facility as “at a minimum, a resourced possessed by the defendant (dominant undertaking) that is vital to the plaintiff’s competitive viability”.[5]

    Although it lost momentum in the U.S., the theory was initially received by the European Union under Article 86 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (ECC Treaty) [current Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)]. The Commission began to consider a dominant undertaking’s refusal to grant access to an essential facility as a possible constitution of abuse of that position of dominance. This idea, developed through a series of decisions by both the European Commission and the Court of Justice, culminated in five rigorous criterion delivered by the Bronner judgment: (i) the dominant undertaking must have refused to supply; (ii) the product, service or infrastructure to which access is requested must be indispensable to allow competition in the downstream market; (iii) the refusal must be likely to result in the elimination of effective competition in said market; (iv) the refusal must be susceptible to cause harm to consumers, and (v) there must be no objective justification for the refusal to supply.[6]

    Continue reading “Bronner lives! (On the role played by Bronner and its essential facilities doctrine on recent competition law affairs)”

    Pornographic deepfakes as a violation of women’s rights

    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.

    Continue reading “Pornographic deepfakes as a violation of women’s rights”