Volume 22 (2022): Issue 2 (December 2022)

Smart cities are purported to produce vast amounts of data of immense value, both commercially and from a governance perspective. The control and stewardship of this smart city data remains controversial, with concerns for the role of the individual smart citizens and the control they exercise over the data they generate. Elinor Ostrom’s Nobel prize winning work on long-lasting and sustainable commons has been suggested as a solution, whereby the commons management principles would be applied to smart city data. This paper seeks to identify the current applications of Ostrom’s commons to smart city data in literature, as well as explore their legal implications. Particularly, what legal challenges may arise from the smart city data commons, and how they could be addressed through legislative frameworks. The article aims to identify and highlight these legal challenges and thereby provide a legal perspective on the concept of smart city data commons.

The article is devoted to the issue of the use of force in self-defense against cyber operations aimed at financial and banking infrastructure that cause only economic (non-material) damage. The article deals with the relationship between the described type of cyber operation and economic coercion, presenting the conclusion that these are different acts, which are subject to a different regime of international law regulation. Attention is also paid to the analytical approaches that can be used to bring cyber operations under the regime of the regulation of the use of force. The main contribution of the article is to capture the evolution of the scholarly debate and state practice in relation to non-destructive cyber operations in the period after the publication of Tallinn Manual 2.0 (post-2017), concluding that even non-destructive cyber operations (including cyber operations against critical financial infrastructure) can fulfil the characteristics of both use of force and armed attack, based on newly available sources, in particular official national positions on the application of international law in cyberspace published by states.

This article analyzed the significance of the ultimatum as a means of declaring aggression against another state in international law, and what influence it has in evaluating the actions of the head of USSR in the context of the events of January 13th 1991. The first part of the article analyzed the classical concept of ultimatum and its meaning in international law. Later, alternative forms of expression of ultimatum, which were formed in the 20th century, and practiced during international conflicts, and their assessment in international law, were analyzed. Finally, after refining the existing legal significance of the ultimatum, we analyzed the significance of the ultimatum against Lithuania issued by the head of the USSR on 10 January 1990, We also examined his further actions on 11–13 January 1991 in evaluating assumptions of his personal responsibility as head of USSR of the armed forces regarding the tragic events of January 13th 1991. As a result of the investigation, it was concluded that the ultimatum of the head of the USSR issued on January 10th, 1991, within the meaning of international law, had a direct connection in the assessment of the issue of criminal liability in relation to international crimes committed by the armed forces of the USSR. The aggressive foreign policy pursued by the head of the USSR in expressing it within a tacit ultimatum based on the try and see method, and subsequently international crimes against the Lithuanian state committed by military units, are considered the actual basis for the emergence of personal criminal liability of the head of the USSR for the events of January 13th, 1991 under international law.

The international human rights system became massive and often difficult to understand even for lawyers themselves. Do we really need different human rights organisations operating both worldwide and locally, dozens of human rights treaties and monitoring bodies? The present paper focuses on the relation between the UN Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council (SP), two mechanisms that may, at the first sight seem largely overlapping in their purpose and, yet, pulling in opposite directions, causing more confusion than bringing benefits. I assert that despite the thematic and jurisdictional overlap of the mechanisms, the UPR and the SP are largely complementary and the existence of both necessary..

In this article, we are assessing the impact of GDPR on the adoption of the Brazilian LGPD regulation. The assessment is done in the context of Europeanization. After the introduction of key concepts, the article is providing deeper insight into the LGPD creation, revealing historical and teleological perceptions of the influence: Moreover, a separate chapter is provided on the comparative dimension. Overall, with the adoption of the GDPR EU created a comprehensive regulatory regime, which was reflected by Brazilian lawmakers, who found strong inspiration in the EU regulation and who have decided to converge in order to avoid losses associated with a potential difference between the EU and Brazilian data market. As a result, LGPD is very similar to the GDPR and in many parts is taking the same attitude..

The protection of human privacy is one of the most disputable topics of European human rights law. That is why the judicial practice of the European Supranational Courts is rich in numerous decisions in this area, since human privacy is one of the most violated human rights, especially in the context of the development of digital technologies. Trying to find protection of their rights through institutional mechanisms of human rights (in particular, through the CJEU and the ECtHR), the applicant often finds himself/herself in a more difficult position: he/she becomes even more an object of public discussion. This phenomenon is especially vividly illustrated by the judicial practice of the European Supranational Courts in the field of protection of the right to be forgotten, which will be paid attention to in this research. At the same time, some suggestions will also be put forward to strengthen the effectiveness of protecting the confidentiality of applicants in the judicial decisions of the Courts.

This contribution analyses how the Ruiz Zambrano doctrine and the genuine enjoyment test have developed in the case law and gives its views on the reasons for the increasing role of the Charter and the silence on the ECHR. It suggests that one reason for the Court’s reluctance to refer to the ECtHR and its case law as well as its unwillingness to use the ECHR when assessing the application of EU law can be seen as a consequence of the problematic development of the ECtHR case law.

Multinational enterprises or transnational corporations are big and influential actors on international scene. Their economic activities might have unfortunately a negative impact on human rights or environment. Current international law does not have any concrete and satisfactory answer to such situation of lacking direct substantial human rights obligations with respect to transnational corporations and corresponding procedural mechanism. Often, this situation is substantiated by missing or unclear concept of international legal personality of those entities. The present article presents international legal personality of transnational corporations from the perspective of the Legally biding instrument on human rights and TNCs drafted by inter-governmental working group. After portraying general features of international legal personality, the author tends to conciliate basic theoretical concept with the TNCs situation. Then the author presents a deep analysis of the Legally binding instrument and comes to the conclusions of maturing international legal personality of transnational corporations.

The concept of legal personality has been and is currently the object of studies. The doctrine is vast and made of many convincing interpretations. For this reason, an excursus of the main theories will be outlined in the light of recent events which support a specific theoretical orientation. The study will give a clear understanding of how international legal personality applies to Non-State Actors. After removing minor doctrines from the equation, those that remain will be highlighted, and compared with how the same matter is de facto faced in international investment law. The relationship between international investment law and international human rights law with regards to the role played by investors will be scrutinised. In investment arbitration, the position of the State and the investor is equal. This leads to the impression that international investment law is the realm in which to ensure more protection for the victims of human rights violations by business enterprises. So, if respect for international human rights is incorporated into the investment arbitral dispute procedures it could protect and or prevent human rights abuses. The opposite approach is to view business activities as objects. In this case, the role to regulate companies and protect stakeholders will be only on the state, and companies will be indirectly obliged to respect human rights. Therefore, the current draft of the binding treaty on business and human rights will be taken into consideration. The analysis of the two approaches will highlight which represents the more stable option for preventing, protecting and remedying human rights abuses by business enterprises. Specifically, the main questions to be answered are: is the international investment law’s field the future for more effective protection of human rights violations coming from business activities? Or is it a states’ prerogative to set and impose rules to prevent and protect such violations?

The article deals with the International Business Mediation and Singapore Mediation Convention on enforcing cross-border mediated settlement agreements. Mediation, as an alternative dispute resolution method, is widely preferred by parties with disputes in many countries. For this reason, in relation to ADR methods including mediation, both in Anglo-American Law and in Continental European Law, various technical and legal arrangements have been made. Mediation Laws in the EU have become one of the regulations bringing out rules that are in conformity with the new developments reflected also in the Singapore Convention on Mediation. Harmonisation initiatives in the EU and in the global world are not confined to intergovernmental activities. The same is also currently ongoing in the field of unification. Also, the private business sector, less restricted by jurisdictional boundaries, is increasingly driving harmonisation in mediation practice and law. As applicable national mediation law is often the same for cross-border and domestic applications, the Singapore convention introduces a contemporary definition of mediation procedural law and offers positive factors that shape it globally. Relevant national and international aspects are presented throughout the first part of this study, with specific sections on international business mediation and international instruments of private international law.

In arbitration, it is the parties who, on the basis of various criteria – experience, references, expertise, previous meetings, etc. – can determine who will decide their dispute as an arbitrator. In this respect, arbitration differs fundamentally from proceedings before the ordinary courts in civil proceedings, where the judge is appointed on the basis of a work schedule and the parties to the dispute cannot change the judge so appointed by agreement. Nonetheless, despite the broad autonomy of the parties, the various legal systems lay down certain conditions which must be met by any person wishing to act as an arbitrator. This article takes a comparative view of these legal conditions to act as an arbitrator and seeks to highlight the differences in the conditions defined, the (in)appropriateness of certain conditions and the fact that a person who does not meet the conditions to act as an arbitrator under one legal system does not automatically mean that he cannot be an arbitrator under another legal system..

Though economic abuse is under researched in Lithuania it is not less widespread nor less serious as physical or sexual violence. The objective of this article is to determine the scope of prosecuting economic abuse in context of domestic violence. Desk research methodology based on case study is used: qualitative content research of Lithuanian case law. The findings of the research suggest that prosecution of economic abuse as a specific form of domestic violence is rather limited in Lithuania: i.e., criminalization is only partial; law enforcement faces difficulties in recognizing and evidencing it; the case law is not adequate (e. g., prosecution mostly focuses on physical violence, it is incident-based, ignores the specifics of domestic violence and economic abuse is commonly interpreted as context of systemic violence but not an independent basis for prosecution). Accordingly, there is a need to enhance criminal law response to economic abuse and explore for the optimal alternative to ensure this in Lithuania.

The prohibition of reformatio in peius is an important procedural institute of the remedies procedure. The prohibition of reformatio in peius means the prohibition of changing a decision for the worse, i.e. to the detriment of the person who has been affected by the contested decision and has himself brought an appeal against that decision or in whose favour such an appeal has been brought. The legal regulation of this institute in the Slovak Republic is unsatisfactory, since there is a different legal regime in the application of the prohibition of reformatio in peius in the derivation of administrative liability for offences and other administrative offences. In the present article, the author compares the legal regulation of the institute of the prohibition of reformatio in peius in the Slovak legal system with the aim of possible inspiration of the legal regulation of this institute in the legal systems of selected states (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic).

The offence of failure to pay alimony under section 196 is one of the most frequent offences in the Czech Republic. Since the protected interest is the right to support and maintain and the most common is the duty of parents towards their children, it is a very serious illegal activity that significantly endangers children and has a negative impact on their development, both health and social. In recent years, Czech legislators have focused on this issue and adopted institutes that strengthen the position of the injured party in these cases. Any kind of sanction has proved to be an ineffective tool for enforcing the delinquent alimony, so it has been necessary to ensure that it can be enforced by other means. Therefore, the legislators broadened the definition of the injured party in criminal proceedings and introduced the so-called substitute alimony. It is also interesting to look into foreign legal regulations and compare selected institutes.