Articles for category: Europa

A Duty to Rescue

Reports of migrants drowning in the Mediterranean have, unfortunately, become more and more frequent in recent years. A recently published MSF report has highlighted the role ‘pushbacks and systematic non-assistance to those at risk of drowning proliferate’ play in this regard. The report refers specifically to two events that happened in 2023 in which national authorities failed to launch rescue operations despite receiving the information on migrants in distress at sea hours before the tragedy. In this blogpost, we assess whether a coast guard’s failure to act in situations of migrants in distress might violate an incumbent criminal law duty to rescue. We map the core elements of the duty to rescue under criminal law and how they might apply to such a chain of events, using the abovementioned event of 14 June as an example.

The EU’s Pacing Problem

The EU regulators face a pacing problem. This has been demonstrated several times during the legislative process of the AI Act itself: for example, the initial Commission proposal from 2021 did not include a definition of General Purpose AI (GPAI). The proposal did not anticipate the rise of Large Language Models like ChatGPT and GPT-4 but only addressed AI systems designed for specific purposes. This lacuna in the original proposal has haunted the EU Parliament, Council and Commission in the past final weeks of the trilogue negotiations, where the inclusion of so-called Frontier Models has been hotly contested. This blog post explores potential boosters for the EU's capacity to regulate AI: delegated legislation, soft law, and a centralized AI office.

One Step Forward, Two Steps Back

This blogpost unpacks some of the ‘democratic paradoxes’ that come with the ‘Defence of Democracy’ package (DoD package), which the European Commission published on Tuesday, 12th of December. While a Recommendation on promoting civic engagement and citizen participation (Civil Society Recommendation) reflects positive changes in the Commission’s conception of democracy, the ‘Directive establishing harmonised requirements in the internal market on transparency of interest representation carried out on behalf of third countries’ (Foreign Funding Directive) directly contradicts this emphasis on a more citizen-centred model and is illustrative of a broader dilemma: how to defend democracy in the EU’s multi-level constitutional space, while keeping the sensitive legal tools for doing so out of the hands of the enemies of democracy that are already – and for the time being irreversibly – on its inside.

»This Is Not a Foreign Agents Law«

On Tuesday, 12 December 2023, the Commission adopted its long-awaited Defence of Democracy package, which includes a Proposal for a Directive on Transparency of Interest Representation on behalf of Third Countries. Dubravka Šuica, Commissioner for Democracy and Demography seemed eager to clarify what the Directive is not. Šuica emphasised that the Directive “is not a foreign agents law”. But the more a statement is repeated, the less credible it appears. Rather, the opposite appears to be true. And so, the devil is not in the name, it lies in enforcement. Despite the Commission’s assertion that full harmonisation of the Directive prevents Member States from gold-plating or potentially worse activities, the Commission has limited control over how Member States apply and enforce their national laws. This is the biggest risk of the proposal.

The EU’s Faustian Bargain

Twelve years into the EU’s rule of law crisis, this week has demonstrated that EU leaders are still unwilling to confront their own complicity in Orbán’s rise and to do something about it. Is this sad spectacle a price worth paying in exchange for a symbolic gesture of goodwill to Ukraine? That is the wrong question to ask. The right question to ask is this: if the EU continues to treat the rule of law as a bargaining chip and to make promises it won’t keep, for how much longer will our Union remain a club worth joining?

Orbán’s Veto Play – The Subsidiarity Card

Viktor Orbán is known to use veto threats in the European Council to get his way. This time, he was keen to see that after months of tense exchanges with the Commission, Hungary gets access to EU funds that had been blocked in order to achieve compliance with the rule of law and fundamental rights conditionality. So, PM Orbán saw it fit to loudly contest Ukraine’s accession and the financial aid package of 50 billion Euros. This may be PM Orbán’s strongest veto play to date.

Daten, Werte und der AI Act

In der letzten Woche erschien hier ein Text mit dem unterstützenswerten Anliegen, auf die Problematik von Ethics-Washing in der Diskussion um die Regulierung Künstlicher Intelligenz und Datenschutz hinzuweisen. Wir meinen, dass dazu andere Fragen gestellt werden müssen, als diejenigen, die der Beitrag aufwirft, und zweitens die angesprochenen Aspekte differenziert werden sollten. Angesichts zahlreicher legislativer Desiderate des KI-Verordnungsvorschlags und des nicht abgeschlossenen Gesetzgebungsprozesses sind diese Diskussionen zu Grundlagen von Technologie-Regulierung aktuell auch dringend geboten. Wir plädieren dafür, Ethik und Werte nicht als Gegensätze zu einer demokratischen Gesetzgebung zu verstehen, sondern als notwendige Komponenten einer informierten regulatorischen Debatte.

Same Old, Same Old

Following the General Affairs Council on 12 December 2023, the Spanish presidency issued its conclusions on the evaluation of the Annual Rule of Law Dialogue (ARoLD). The overly positive assessment that transpires from the conclusion fails to convince, due to the continued reliance on confidentiality and the lack of any tangible standards. Moreover, the improvements suggested by the Presidency fall overwhelmingly short of addressing the issues that plague this instrument, confirming it as a weak exercise in posturing with no real stakes involved.  

To Score Is to Decide

Can the act of assigning a score to someone constitute a decision? This, in essence, is the question the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) had to answer in Case C-634/21. And the Court’s answer is yes, following in the footsteps of the Advocate General’s opinion on the case. Rendered on 7 December, this ruling was eagerly awaited as it was the first time the Court had the opportunity to interpret the notorious Article 22 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) prohibiting decisions “based solely on automated processing".

The Future of the Rule of Law in the EU

With systemic threats to and violations of the rule of law not subsiding, notwithstanding the expected end of backsliding in the case of Poland, the future of the rule of law in the EU is likely to be one of retrenchment accompanied by increased gaslighting to mask an increased gap between EU rhetoric and EU action. This means that the Commission’s decision to unlock € 10 bn of EU funding previously frozen on rule of law grounds to “sway Viktor Orbán on Ukraine” should not be seen as a once-off aberration but as prefiguration of a new abnormal normal.