The Ghost of Moria
How the Mytilene criminal court deals with the case against the Moria 4 in the court of second instance.
Articles for category: AAA General
The Sovereign Protection Office as the Tip of the Iceberg
In December 2023, the Hungarian Parliament passed a law establishing a Sovereign Protection Office—a state administration which now possesses unfettered access to personal data to find and sanction supposed foreign agents among the Hungarian populace. This office operates at will and without oversight, offers no avenue for legal redress, and wields prison time upwards of three years. In recent weeks, the European Commission launched an infringement proceeding over the law, and the European Parliament called on the European Council to consider Article 7(2) procedures.
Judging Nicaragua’s Public Interest Litigation in The Hague
The judicialisation of Israel’s war in Gaza has taken a significant turn, with Nicaragua boldly entering the scene and executing two distinct actions. This post contributes to understanding Nicaragua’s two moves before the ICJ by analysing three dimensions. First, the country’s rich relationship with the Court. Second, the prioritisation of political impact and visibility over adjudicative success. Finally, the normative assessments concerning Nicaragua’s moral standing and intentions.
Brazilian Judges Regulate Elections … and AI
Brazil has new regulations on AI and election interference. Also, in Brazil, the judiciary oversees elections. As municipal elections are coming up, we face a quite unique situation of technological challenges, untested laws, and unusual institutional arrangements. Although innovative, these regulations are constrained in their effectiveness and indifference to broader regulatory debates concerning the regulation of AI, showcasing an uncomfortable relationship between judicial and legislative powers regarding digital policy in Brazil. Disregarding the complexity of AI, the regulations legitimise the expansion of the judicial branch's power to deal with digital threats to democracy while not fully engaging with how these threats materialise through the development and use of AI.
Reconceptualizing Legislative Privileges
Earlier this month, the Indian Supreme Court delivered a judgment in a reference pertaining to the law and scope of legislative privileges under the Indian Constitution. The primary question before the court was whether legislative privileges extend to the protection from prosecution of a legislator who receives a bribe to speak or vote in a certain manner in the legislature. In the following sections of this post, I’ll first discuss the existing law on legislative privileges in India, which is unique in its origination and formulation. I’ll then argue that there is a need to reconceptualize the understanding of legislative privileges in order to support the legislative systems in performing their roles and functions in their true essence.
Shortcomings of the AI Act
After the much-awaited vote of the 13th March 2024 by the European Parliament, it is time to begin evaluating the state of fundamental rights in light of the AI Act. In this blog post, three areas of potential inconsistencies and risks are examined: differentiation of provider and deployer, biometrics used in real-time and post-factum, and the standards of biometric recognition in the areas of immigration.
CILFIT in Strasbourg
On 19 February 2024, the European Court of Human Rights decided not to answer the Estonian Supreme Court’s request for an advisory opinion on the basis of Protocol 16 (P16). For the first time, it dismissed a request because it did not concern a question of principle concerning the interpretation and application of ECHR rights. The decision is significant because the ECtHR provides clear contours as to what types of questions courts should (not) ask.
Privileges Constrained
Last week, the Indian Supreme Court delivered its judgment in Sita Soren v. Union of India, holding that parliamentary privilege – the constitutionally recognized legal immunity of legislators – does not extend to bribe-taking for exercising their legislative vote or speech a certain way. In this blog post, I discuss the Court’s formulation of the essentiality test, as well as its conclusions on the availability of privilege for bribe-taking. I argue that while the ruling can strengthen democratic institutions since it protects the integrity of legislative processes, certain risks in the essentiality test’s composition – which risk depriving important legislative functions of privilege – must be addressed.
What is Living and What is Dead in the Turkish Parliament?
On January 30th, 2024, the Turkish Parliament officially revoked the mandate of Can Atalay, an opposition MP representing the earthquake-affected city of Hatay. Atalay's incident, from its inception to the recent parliamentary drama, not only exposes the diminished authority of the Constitutional Court but also exemplifies the tacit cooperation among the regime's loyal officers—judges, MPs, or civil servants. In this subtle network, the Parliament occupies a peculiar place with its distinct symbolism, serving as a fig leaf for authoritarian politics.
Conspicuously Absent
Nicaragua alleges that Germany violates the Genocide Convention and international humanitarian law by assisting Israel and also by failing to prevent violations of these bodies of law. It requests the International Court of Justice to indicate provisional measures, which would oblige Germany inter alia to stop assisting Israel. While the Court may be barred from exercising its jurisdiction over Nicaragua’s claims relating to the Genocide Convention it may be able to hear the claims regarding Germany’s duties under IHL.
