Repositório Comunidade: ED_CEDUED_CEDUhttps://hdl.handle.net/1822/194642024-03-19T04:08:11Z2024-03-19T04:08:11ZTrans rights in the European Union – “sex” v. “gender” on the path towards equality and non-discriminationCardoso, Anahttps://hdl.handle.net/1822/862912023-09-04T14:39:55Z2023-09-04T14:39:54ZTítulo: Trans rights in the European Union – “sex” v. “gender” on the path towards equality and non-discrimination
Autor: Cardoso, Ana
Resumo: Equality and non-discrimination are two of the most important foundational values of the European Union (EU). But a rapidly evolving society means that their practical application has to be constantly under review to assess if their content and objectives are being fulfilled. When it comes to the rights of the LGBTIQ community – here in particular of trans when compared with cis women – there is still a long way to go to effectively safeguard them, while reasonably protecting all involved. Terminological confusion around the concepts of “sex” and “gender” has served to justify the curtailment of the fight for equality and non-discrimination, and relegate trans women to a position of second-class citizens. The EU needs to review its approach to this particular issue and enshrine into law the concepts of “sex” and “gender” as a way to continue to push forward in its fight for LGBTIQ rights, doing justice to its moniker of “rainbow Europe”.
<b>Tipo</b>: article2023-09-04T14:39:54ZThe crisis of the common European asylum system: rethinking solidarity in light of human rightsDi Nunzio, Paolahttps://hdl.handle.net/1822/862762023-09-04T09:59:22Z2023-09-04T09:59:22ZTítulo: The crisis of the common European asylum system: rethinking solidarity in light of human rights
Autor: Di Nunzio, Paola
Resumo: In 2015, the unprecedented arrival of refugees and irregular migrants in the European Union (EU) put a strain on the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), thus exposing a number of deficiencies in EU external border, asylum and migration policy. The need to reform the system became urgent and the EU was presented with both a challenge and an opportunity to further advance towards a much-needed consensual and long-term solution for the harmonisation of the asylum system, standing on the basis of solidarity and responsibility-sharing. This paper argues that the new comprehensive approach to migration and asylum praised by the European Commission (EC) is still missing in the recent Pact on Migration and Asylum of 2020, which represents more a missed opportunity than the real reform that the CEAS needs. The chosen legislative path, the dualistic understanding concerning the approach to migrants, and the new solidarity mechanism envisioned in the Pact show how the lack of consensus among Member States, the tendency towards the creation of a
“Fortress Europe”, and an asymmetric idea of inter-state solidarity prevail, preventing the development of a common European framework for migration management that is both effective and in line with the EU’s values and objectives. This paper further argues that, if the EU fails to shift the paradigm of solidarity, the system is at risk of remaining fractured and incapable of withstanding the future challenges of migration. A new framework must be grounded on the principle of solidarity, as defined in the Article 80 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) which, in turn, needs to move from a state-centred approach to a concept of solidarity based on affected individuals, thus setting its foundations on a human rights basis. The EU needs, in fact, to strongly step up as a humanitarian actor and place protection and responsibility-sharing at the centre of its agenda: the protection of fundamental human rights in its territory and beyond is at stake.
<b>Tipo</b>: article2023-09-04T09:59:22ZHow can there be an ecological transition without a just transition? – starting with the European UnionMachado, Natalyhttps://hdl.handle.net/1822/862742023-09-04T09:49:01Z2023-09-04T09:49:00ZTítulo: How can there be an ecological transition without a just transition? – starting with the European Union
Autor: Machado, Nataly
Resumo: Understanding that the nations and nation states that have historically contributed the least to climate change suffer the most from its impacts and have fewer opportunities to protect themselves or adapt to them is the first step in the process of understanding the importance of a just and inclusive transition for all. In an immense diversity of realities, this very notion is no different in the context of the European Union. This article seeks to show the need to find concrete tools, through the European Union’s protagonism, for an ecological transition with social justice.
<b>Tipo</b>: article2023-09-04T09:49:00ZAutomated individual decision-making and profiling [on case C-634/21 - SCHUFA (Scoring)]Silveira, Alessandrahttps://hdl.handle.net/1822/861522023-10-12T08:50:09Z2023-08-29T14:30:21ZTítulo: Automated individual decision-making and profiling [on case C-634/21 - SCHUFA (Scoring)]
Autor: Silveira, Alessandra
Resumo: Automated decision-making and profiling are finally being considered before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Article 22 GDPR states that “the data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her” – but its provisions raise many doubts to the legal doctrine and to the referring court in the SCHUFA case. The problem with this case law lies in the opacity of inferences or predictions resulting from data analysis, particularly by AI systems – inferences whose application to everyday situations determines how each of us, as personal data subjects, are perceived and evaluated by others. The CJEU has the opportunity to assess the existence of legal remedies to challenge operations which
result in automated inferences that are not reasonably justified. However, the effectiveness of the
application of the GDPR to inferred data faces several obstacles. This has to do with fact that the
GDPR was designed for data provided directly by the data subject – and not for data inferred by digital technologies such as AI systems. This is the difficulty behind the Advocate General’s Opinion.
<b>Tipo</b>: article2023-08-29T14:30:21ZA post-factual societyFernandes, Patríciahttps://hdl.handle.net/1822/823952023-02-01T20:38:14Z2023-02-01T20:38:14ZTítulo: A post-factual society
Autor: Fernandes, Patrícia
Resumo: In 2016 Oxford Dictionaries declared “post-truth” as its international word of the
year, and in the last years our vocabulary has enlarged with words and expressions such as alternative
facts, disinformation, misinformation, fake news, etc.. Media and social media have undertaken factcheck
mechanisms, and several academics have engaged in research on conspiracy theories. One seems
to live in a post-factual society, with crucial implications concerning our democratic regimes. This
paper aims to address this problem, adopting a philosophic-political approach. Firstly, I consider the
emergence of Modernity and its relation to scientific revolutions and the inception of science as a vital
arrangement of this historical period. For two centuries we had a strong consensus on the value of
science as a tool to describe, understand and control nature and reality – and the notion of fact was
central to that consensus. Furthermore, liberal democracy was developed from the conviction that, albeit
our different opinions concerning political values, one’s discussion would be confined by facts that were
not disputable. That old world seems to have disappeared as a new period has emerged since the 1960s,
usually designated as postmodernity. Therefore, secondly, I address the rise of the postmodern period.
Obsessed with language and identity, postmodernity has gradually made the ideas of truth and fact
vulnerable – even obsolescent. Which consequences result in Western societies and liberal democracies?
May democracies survive the assault on truth, science, and the very idea of fact? Or are we condemned
to the next stage of government, according to Plato: authoritarianism?
<b>Tipo</b>: article2023-02-01T20:38:14Z