Articles for category: English Articles

The Catalan Amnesty in the Spanish Constitutional Court

On 26 June 2025, the Spanish Constitutional Court ruled that the Amnesty Act “for the Institutional, Political and Social Normalization in Catalonia” is constitutional. The decision appears to reflect a pragmatic rather than a principled understanding of the amnesty – in other words, it treats the amnesty as an instrument to normalise the political situation in Catalonia rather than a measure for redressing possible rights violations resulting from the criminal convictions.

The NGO’s Guide to Authoritarianism

It appears that whenever expert civil society organizations release a legal analysis of draft laws that restrict fundamental rights and freedoms, authoritarian governments learn from their mistakes and avoid them in the next round. One could witness such a situation when the Foreign Agents Registration Bill was introduced in the Slovak parliament last spring, and the public watchdog and advocacy organization VIA IURIS tried to stand against this legislation. In one year, the Slovak parliament considered three versions of the Bill, with each version making it more challenging to fight in court.

Spanish Judges on Strike

“Save the rule of Law in Spain”, read a banner held by a number of unidentified judges who were demonstrating before the premises of the Spanish Supreme Court, a couple of days ago in Madrid. But save it – from whom? The demonstrators would no doubt reply: from Pedro Sánchez and his government, which has undertaken the first serious reform of the Spanish judiciary since the transition to democracy. But the reform is not the only reason why the Spanish judges have been on strike.

The Finish Line of Caster Semenya’s Judicial Marathon

Caster Semenya was wronged, and Switzerland – due to the inaction of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (SFSC) – was held responsible by the Grand Chamber (GC) of the ECtHR. This conclusion to a long judicial marathon is an important vindication for an athlete who saw her career destroyed by a process that violated her right to a fair hearing. The case will be remembered as a significant landmark that will affect the field of transnational sports law and governance for years to come.

Laboratories of Authoritarianism

In Mahmoud v. Taylor, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the 1st Amendment Free Exercise Clause to grant conservative religious parents a constitutional right to remove their children from any classroom where a teacher includes LGBTQAI+ people in the curriculum. In effect, the Court has allowed public schools to discourage mutual tolerance, parents to opt out of Equal Protection, and fringe legal strategists to continue to use children’s constitutional rights as a test case for authoritarianism. In doing so, the erosion of children’s rights becomes the foundation upon which other rights are eroded.

Vet Bills and the EU Charter

Over the past decade, concerns about rising veterinary costs and their impact on animal welfare have sparked growing debate across Europe and North America. In the EU, veterinary pricing is largely unregulated, leading to significant variation in costs and transparency across Member States – prompting scrutiny from competition authorities in countries like the UK, the Netherlands, and Sweden. If Charter rights, particularly Article 37 on sustainability, are to carry real weight in relation to animals, the current state of the veterinary market in Europe warrants closer examination.

Reforming the GDPR

After a surge of new digital legislation over the past two years, the European Commission appears to have no intention of easing its pace in reshaping Europe’s regulatory landscape. This includes proposals to reform the GDPR. Regulatory reforms should, however, focus on strengthening enforcement and fixing the structural problems of the GDPR, rather than merely simplifying and deregulating it.

A Differentiated Path Forward

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ (IACtHR) Advisory Opinion OC-32/25 on the “Climate Emergency and Human Rights” represents a transformative moment in international legal doctrine on climate-induced displacement and shows why the IACtHR’s conclusions constitute not merely an incremental development, but a fundamental reorientation of the human rights law approach to one of the most pressing challenges of our time.

Silencing Children’s Rights

The U.S. Supreme Court decided Mahmoud v. Taylor on June 27, 2025. In doing so, it dramatically expanded parental rights over students and education without concern for the rights of children or consideration of pedagogy and curriculum. Instead of addressing the plurality of views around sexual orientation and gender, the Court indirectly, but unsubtly, installs a traditional values framework that imposes norms of heterosexuality, religious fundamentalism and parental micromanagement of curriculum.