Search Results (9)

As AI-driven solutions continue to revolutionise the tech industry, scholars have rightly cautioned about the risks of ‘ethics washing’. In this paper, we make a case for adopting a human rights-based ethical framework for regulating AI. We argue that human rights frameworks can be regarded as the common denominator between law and ethics and have a crucial role to play in the ethics-based legal governance of AI. This article examines the extent to which human rights-based regulation has been achieved in the primary example of legislation regulating AI governance, i.e., the EU AI Act 2024/1689. While the AI Act has a firm commitment to protect human rights, which in the EU legal order have been given expression in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, we argue that this alone does not contain adequate guarantees for enforcing some of these rights. This is because issues such as EU competence and the principle of subsidiarity make the idea of protection of fundamental rights by the EU rather than national constitutions controversial. However, we argue that human rights-based, ethical regulation of AI in the EU could be achieved through contextualisation within a values-based framing. In this context, we explore what are termed ‘European values’, which are values on which the EU was founded, notably Article 2 TEU, and consider the extent to which these could provide an interpretative framework to support effective regulation of AI and avoid ‘ethics washing’. Full article

The current state of physical inactivity of people can be traced back to the people who have been denied their fundamental human right to physical education and participation in school sports (PES). Growing up without the fundamental human right to free movement and participation in sports activities enabled students to stay physically inactive. The purpose of this study was to explore what is currently known about the role of PES in all areas of human development and SDGs and to raise awareness about PES, which has been shown to be on the decline. To increase the study’s overall efficacy, an external desk research approach was employed to gather relevant information published online: reports, policies, charters, recommendations, and other relevant articles from various electronic databases and websites of international organizations responsible for PES, culture, and health. PES benefits are discussed in all domains of human development, including physical and mental health, cognitive, psychosocial, and moral benefits. Contrary to its importance to human growth as a whole, PES has been sidelined since the end of the twentieth century. An awareness of the subject of PES has thus been raised as a backbone of the entire community in the twenty-first century, so as to translate the promises and policies of PES into realities and practices. Full article

These notes describe the evolution of the EU strategy for the integration of Third Country Nationals since the Tampere Program in 1999 until the second Action Program (2021–2027). It highlights the EU’s endeavor to close the gap between migrants and EU citizens in compliance with the EU general anti-discrimination policy and, since the entry of the Lisbon Treaty into force, of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Accordingly, the current integration strategy has a much wider legal and financial basis than the one described by art. 79.2 of the TFEU. This new individual-centered and wide-ranging public approach can now be strengthened through the new European Digital Agenda, whose aim is also to reframe and make the relations between the individual and public administration more user friendly. However, in the human mobility domain, the large EU acquis, which is currently focused on internal security, should be re-balanced from a legislative and operational point of view to avoid the risk of infringing on data protection principles and establishing a mass surveillance framework, which could be incompatible with the EU as a democratic society and a rule of law-abiding organization. Within this very complex framework, a promising development is the establishment of a new European Asylum Agency, which may pave the way for more consistent EU asylum and migration policies. Full article

Since 1 December 2009, the time when the Treaty of Lisbon came into force, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (hereinafter: the EU Charter, the Charter) has been formally included in the EU legal order as primary EU law [...] Full article

The adoption of the Charter of Fundamental Rights has strengthened the position of the European Ombudsman, since the Charter contains an article specifically dedicated to the Ombudsman. At the same time, the Ombudsman, through her/his practice, contributes to the implementation in the everyday life of the provisions of the Charter and their further development. The consolidation and development of the provisions of the Charter by the European Ombudsman have proceeded especially rapidly since the Charter of Fundamental Rights received the status of a binding act. Due to the fact that the right to “good administration” contained in the Charter of Fundamental Rights has become one of the basic human rights in the EU since the Charter became legally binding, the competence of the European Ombudsman has acquired a new substantive and factual (functional) content, expanding her/his ability to positively influence the EU administration in the field of governance and respect for fundamental rights. This article examines, based on legal acts, statistical and other factual data, the interrelated issues (such as institutional and human dimensions of European integration) of ensuring the effectiveness of the Charter of Fundamental Rights through the activities of the European Ombudsman. Full article

This article examines the extent to which the inclusion of the European Union (EU) Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Treaty of Lisbon, which gives legal force to socio-economic rights as well as civil and political rights, will succeed in helping EU member states meet international treaty obligations to implement socio-economic rights. Will the EU’s renewed commitment to developing the social sphere, post-Brexit, be more successful and will British citizens lose out on so-cio-economic rights in the long term if the EU succeeds in creating a better social or public dimension? Member states of the EU that have ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) have obligations to progressively realise economic, social and cultural (ESC) rights. Progress on this has been slow and potentially made more difficult by the economic direction adopted by the EU since the 1980s. Although the EU, from the beginning, saw itself as a “social market” it struggled to embed the “social” to the same extent that it embedded the “market”. Critics argue that the economic policies of the EU and key judgements of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) successfully dis-embedded the market from its social context. Additionally, the regulatory regime of the EU developed in a direction that limited the capacity of nation states to ameliorate the consequences of market-led policies for the least advantaged. However, the Charter of Rights, which places socio-economic rights on an equal footing with civil and political rights, is a novel and bold initiative. It has stimulated debate on whether the Charter could rebalance the EU’s economic agenda by paying attention to the social consequences of predominantly market-led policies. This paper examines the potential impact of the EU Charter, in the context of member states international human rights obligations, to create an environment where member states of the EU have fewer obstacles to the “progressive realization” of ESC rights. Full article

Central to EU law and policies is the protection of human rights. For the European Union (EU), these rights are sacrosanct. Over the years, more substance to the protection of fundamental rights emerged. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) is notably entrusted with the protection of human rights and has always deemed it imperative that fundamental rights must be protected within the scope of EU law. The Court has always relied on strong European traditions and values and is guided by the inalienable principle of the rule of law. In the human rights record of the EU, the Kadi cases occupy a special place. The scope of the application of Article 46 is limited, and the application of the Charter is still not used to its full potential, and too few citizens are even aware of it. The Commission intends to present a strategy that would improve the use and awareness of the Charter. By the middle of 2020, the UK’s withdrawal from the EU had become acrimonious. One issue that still begs the conclusion is the status of and protection available to EU citizens living in the UK beyond 31 December 2020. These basic rights of its citizens are not negotiable for the EU. Full article

The purpose of this article is to assess the impact of the UK government’s response to the Covid-19 outbreak from a human rights perspective, particularly its apparent tension with Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in relation to non-Covid-19 patients whose lives were put at risk by not being able to attend appointments and treatments for pre-existing conditions and illnesses. The UK has also rejected the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union with the European Union Withdrawal Act 2018, which will leave the population even more exposed to potential human rights violations. This seems to be a direct consequence of the narrative and slogan employed by the government: “Stay Home; Protect the NHS; Save Lives”. Other potentially threatened categories, the NHS staff and prisoners are also mentioned in the same context. The latter have already launched a judicial review application along the same lines: Article 2 of the ECHR and the due regard duty stemming from the Equality Act 2010. The NHS staff were directly at risk, and evidence was emerging almost on a daily basis that implied authorities’ responsibility for the shortage of personal protective equipment and testing kits. While there have been a number of discussions on other issues in relation to the lockdown and the strategy directly or indirectly impacting human rights, it appears that no discussion on the impact of the strategy for non-Covid-19 patients and other categories from a human rights perspective has taken place. This gap in analyses and literature merits the present analysis. Full article

Mycotoxins are major food contaminants affecting global food security, especially in low and middle-income countries. The European Union (EU) funded project, MycoKey, focuses on “Integrated and innovative key actions for mycotoxin management in the food and feed chains” and the right to safe food through mycotoxin management strategies and regulation, which are fundamental to minimizing the unequal access to safe and sufficient food worldwide. As part of the MycoKey project, a Mycotoxin Charter (charter.mycokey.eu) was launched to share the need for global harmonization of mycotoxin legislation and policies and to minimize human and animal exposure worldwide, with particular attention to less developed countries that lack effective legislation. This document is in response to a demand that has built through previous European Framework Projects—MycoGlobe and MycoRed—in the previous decade to control and reduce mycotoxin contamination worldwide. All suppliers, participants and beneficiaries of the food supply chain, for example, farmers, consumers, stakeholders, researchers, members of civil society and government and so forth, are invited to sign this charter and to support this initiative. Full article