Human rights
Seipp, T.; Fahy, R.; Drunen, M. van
Defining the ‘media’ in Europe: pitfalls of the proposed European Media Freedom Act Journal Article
In: Journal of Media Law, 2023.
@article{nokey,
title = {Defining the ‘media’ in Europe: pitfalls of the proposed European Media Freedom Act},
author = {Seipp, T. and Fahy, R. and Drunen, M. van},
doi = {10.1080/17577632.2023.2240998},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-07-31},
journal = {Journal of Media Law},
abstract = {This comment examines the definition of ‘media’ under the recently-proposed European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), and highlights its potential flaws, while pointing to possible considerations for future improvement. Notably, the narrow service-based approach to defining ‘media’ under Article 2 EMFA appears to be in conflict with the functional approach to defining media under European and international human rights law. Additionally, a lack of transparency and safeguards regarding how the criteria of ‘editorial independence’ is to be assessed, especially under Article 17 EMFA, is problematic. The risk that such decisions are made based on commercial and/or political considerations rather than established standards of media freedom must be avoided, especially when platforms are to assess editorial independence.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This comment examines the definition of ‘media’ under the recently-proposed European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), and highlights its potential flaws, while pointing to possible considerations for future improvement. Notably, the narrow service-based approach to defining ‘media’ under Article 2 EMFA appears to be in conflict with the functional approach to defining media under European and international human rights law. Additionally, a lack of transparency and safeguards regarding how the criteria of ‘editorial independence’ is to be assessed, especially under Article 17 EMFA, is problematic. The risk that such decisions are made based on commercial and/or political considerations rather than established standards of media freedom must be avoided, especially when platforms are to assess editorial independence.
van Daalen, O.
The right to encryption: Privacy as preventing unlawful access Journal Article
In: Computer Law & Security Review, vol. 49, 2023.
@article{nokey,
title = {The right to encryption: Privacy as preventing unlawful access},
author = {van Daalen, O.},
url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0267364923000146},
doi = {10.1016/j.clsr.2023.105804},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-05-23},
journal = {Computer Law \& Security Review},
volume = {49},
abstract = {Encryption technologies are a fundamental building block of modern digital infrastructure, but plans to curb these technologies continue to spring up. Even in the European Union, where their application is by now firmly embedded in legislation, lawmakers are again calling for measures which would impact these technologies. One of the most important arguments in this debate are human rights, most notably the rights to privacy and to freedom of expression. And although some authors have in the past explored how encryption technologies support human rights, this connection is not yet firmly grounded in an analysis of European human rights case law. This contribution aims to fill this gap, developing a framework for assessing restrictions of encryption technologies under the rights to privacy and freedom of expression as protected under the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention) and the Charter of Fundamental rights in the European Union (the Charter). In the first section, the relevant function of encryption technologies, restricting access to information (called confidentiality), is discussed. In the second section, an overview of some governmental policies and practices impacting these technologies is provided. This continues with a discussion of the case law on the rights to privacy, data protection and freedom of expression, arguing that these rights are not only about ensuring lawful access by governments to protected information, but also about preventing unlawful access by others. And because encryption technologies are an important technology to reduce the risk of this unlawful access, it is then proposed that this risk is central to the assessment of governance measures in the field of encryption technologies. The article concludes by recommending that states perform an in-depth assessement of this when proposing new measures, and that courts when reviewing them also place the risk of unlawful access central to the analysis of interference and proportionality.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Encryption technologies are a fundamental building block of modern digital infrastructure, but plans to curb these technologies continue to spring up. Even in the European Union, where their application is by now firmly embedded in legislation, lawmakers are again calling for measures which would impact these technologies. One of the most important arguments in this debate are human rights, most notably the rights to privacy and to freedom of expression. And although some authors have in the past explored how encryption technologies support human rights, this connection is not yet firmly grounded in an analysis of European human rights case law. This contribution aims to fill this gap, developing a framework for assessing restrictions of encryption technologies under the rights to privacy and freedom of expression as protected under the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention) and the Charter of Fundamental rights in the European Union (the Charter). In the first section, the relevant function of encryption technologies, restricting access to information (called confidentiality), is discussed. In the second section, an overview of some governmental policies and practices impacting these technologies is provided. This continues with a discussion of the case law on the rights to privacy, data protection and freedom of expression, arguing that these rights are not only about ensuring lawful access by governments to protected information, but also about preventing unlawful access by others. And because encryption technologies are an important technology to reduce the risk of this unlawful access, it is then proposed that this risk is central to the assessment of governance measures in the field of encryption technologies. The article concludes by recommending that states perform an in-depth assessement of this when proposing new measures, and that courts when reviewing them also place the risk of unlawful access central to the analysis of interference and proportionality.
Senftleben, M.; Quintais, J.; Meiring, A.
In: 2023.
@article{nokey,
title = {Outsourcing Human Rights Obligations and Concealing Human Rights Deficits: The Example of Monetizing User-Generated Content Under the CDSM Directive and the Digital Services Act},
author = {Senftleben, M. and Quintais, J. and Meiring, A.},
url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4421150},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-04-26},
abstract = {With the shift from the traditional safe harbor for hosting to statutory content filtering and licensing obligations, EU copyright law has substantially curtailed the freedom of users to upload and share their content creations. Seeking to avoid overbroad inroads into freedom of expression, EU law obliges online platforms and the creative industry to take into account human rights when coordinating their content filtering actions. Platforms must also establish complaint and redress procedures for users. The European Commission will initiate stakeholder dialogues to identify best practices. These “safety valves” in the legislative package, however, are mere fig leaves. Instead of safeguarding human rights, the EU legislator outsources human rights obligations to the platform industry. At the same time, the burden of policing content moderation systems is imposed on users who are unlikely to bring complaints in each individual case. The new legislative design in the EU will thus “conceal” human rights violations instead of bringing them to light. Nonetheless, the DSA rests on the same \textendash highly problematic \textendash approach.
Against this background, the paper discusses the weakening \textendash and potential loss \textendash of fundamental freedoms as a result of the departure from the traditional notice-and-takedown approach. Adding a new element to the ongoing debate on content licensing and filtering, the analysis will devote particular attention to the fact that EU law, for the most part, has left untouched the private power of platforms to determine the “house rules” governing the most popular copyright-owner reaction to detected matches between protected works and content uploads: the (algorithmic) monetization of that content. Addressing the “legal vacuum” in the field of content monetization, the analysis explores outsourcing and concealment risks in this unregulated space. Focusing on large-scale platforms for user-generated content, such as YouTube, Instagram and TikTok, two normative problems come to the fore: (1) the fact that rightholders, when opting for monetization, de facto monetize not only their own rights but also the creative input of users; (2) the fact that user creativity remains unremunerated as long as the monetization option is only available to rightholders. As a result of this configuration, the monetization mechanism disregards users’ right to (intellectual) property and discriminates against user creativity. Against this background, we discuss whether the DSA provisions that seek to ensure transparency of content moderation actions and terms and conditions offer useful sources of information that could empower users. Moreover, we raise the question whether the detailed regulation of platform actions in the DSA may resolve the described human rights dilemmas to some extent.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
With the shift from the traditional safe harbor for hosting to statutory content filtering and licensing obligations, EU copyright law has substantially curtailed the freedom of users to upload and share their content creations. Seeking to avoid overbroad inroads into freedom of expression, EU law obliges online platforms and the creative industry to take into account human rights when coordinating their content filtering actions. Platforms must also establish complaint and redress procedures for users. The European Commission will initiate stakeholder dialogues to identify best practices. These “safety valves” in the legislative package, however, are mere fig leaves. Instead of safeguarding human rights, the EU legislator outsources human rights obligations to the platform industry. At the same time, the burden of policing content moderation systems is imposed on users who are unlikely to bring complaints in each individual case. The new legislative design in the EU will thus “conceal” human rights violations instead of bringing them to light. Nonetheless, the DSA rests on the same – highly problematic – approach.
Against this background, the paper discusses the weakening – and potential loss – of fundamental freedoms as a result of the departure from the traditional notice-and-takedown approach. Adding a new element to the ongoing debate on content licensing and filtering, the analysis will devote particular attention to the fact that EU law, for the most part, has left untouched the private power of platforms to determine the “house rules” governing the most popular copyright-owner reaction to detected matches between protected works and content uploads: the (algorithmic) monetization of that content. Addressing the “legal vacuum” in the field of content monetization, the analysis explores outsourcing and concealment risks in this unregulated space. Focusing on large-scale platforms for user-generated content, such as YouTube, Instagram and TikTok, two normative problems come to the fore: (1) the fact that rightholders, when opting for monetization, de facto monetize not only their own rights but also the creative input of users; (2) the fact that user creativity remains unremunerated as long as the monetization option is only available to rightholders. As a result of this configuration, the monetization mechanism disregards users’ right to (intellectual) property and discriminates against user creativity. Against this background, we discuss whether the DSA provisions that seek to ensure transparency of content moderation actions and terms and conditions offer useful sources of information that could empower users. Moreover, we raise the question whether the detailed regulation of platform actions in the DSA may resolve the described human rights dilemmas to some extent.
van Daalen, O.; van Hoboken, J.; Rucz, M.
Export control of cybersurveillance items in the new dual-use regulation: The challenges of applying human rights logic to export control Journal Article
In: Computer Law & Security Review, vol. 48, 2023.
@article{nokey,
title = {Export control of cybersurveillance items in the new dual-use regulation: The challenges of applying human rights logic to export control},
author = {van Daalen, O. and van Hoboken, J. and Rucz, M.},
doi = {10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105789},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-04-21},
journal = {Computer Law \& Security Review},
volume = {48},
abstract = {In 2021, the Recast Dual-Use Regulation entered into force. The regulation includes a heavily debated new provision on the export control of so-called cybersurveillance items. This provision departs from the traditional logic of export control rules in multiple ways. Most importantly, it positions human rights considerations as an important factor in the export control of a flexible range of technologies. This article explores the operation, implications and challenges of this new human rights-orientated approach to export control of digital surveillance technologies. Taking the definition of cybersurveillance items as a starting point of the analysis, the article draws on surveillance-related case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union, to define the potential scope of application of the open-ended cybersurveillance concept of the Regulation. By exploring how this concept maps to technologies often connected with human rights infringements, such as facial recognition, location tracking and open-source intelligence, the article highlights the challenges of applying this new approach and underscores the need for its further development in practice.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
In 2021, the Recast Dual-Use Regulation entered into force. The regulation includes a heavily debated new provision on the export control of so-called cybersurveillance items. This provision departs from the traditional logic of export control rules in multiple ways. Most importantly, it positions human rights considerations as an important factor in the export control of a flexible range of technologies. This article explores the operation, implications and challenges of this new human rights-orientated approach to export control of digital surveillance technologies. Taking the definition of cybersurveillance items as a starting point of the analysis, the article draws on surveillance-related case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union, to define the potential scope of application of the open-ended cybersurveillance concept of the Regulation. By exploring how this concept maps to technologies often connected with human rights infringements, such as facial recognition, location tracking and open-source intelligence, the article highlights the challenges of applying this new approach and underscores the need for its further development in practice.
Chocarro, S.; Harrison,J.; McGonagle, T.; Parmar, S.; Torsner, S.
Closing the normative gap: What ten years of Human Rights Council Resolutions tell us about its approach to the safety of journalists Technical Report
2022, (Working paper, the seventh Academic Conference on the Safety of Journalists, jointly organised by the University of the Republic and UNESCO, World Press Freedom Day in Punta del Este, Uruguay).
@techreport{nokey,
title = {Closing the normative gap: What ten years of Human Rights Council Resolutions tell us about its approach to the safety of journalists },
author = {Chocarro, S. and Harrison,J. and McGonagle, T. and Parmar, S. and Torsner, S. },
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/nl/closing-the-normative-gap/
https://www.article19.org/resources/world-press-freedom-day-journalism-under-siege/},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-05-03},
urldate = {2022-05-03},
abstract = {In the last ten years, there have been high levels of development of normative work within the United Nations (UN) system on the issue of the safety of journalists. Since the approval of the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity in 2012, the first ever UN strategy on this matter, and the subsequent first Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution on the safety of journalists that same year, fifteen resolutions have been adopted by the principal UN Charter-based bodies, namely the Security Council, the General Assembly and the HRC, and also UNESCO.
The HRC resolutions, which have been adopted on a biennial basis, have proven to be the most progressive in addressing the safety of journalists from a human rights-based perspective. However, the main challenge remains their effective implementation. How have these resolutions evolved and what do they reveal about how the issue of the safety of journalists is addressed by the HRC? What are the shortcomings and gaps in the protection of the safety of journalists offered by this set of resolutions?
To answer these questions, this paper first undertakes a qualitative document analysis of HRC resolutions. It then analyzes the development of these resolutions from a humanrights perspective. Finally, based on this analysis, it identifies the normative gaps that should be addressed in order to properly respond to the most pressing challenges to the safety of journalists in the years to come.
},
note = {Working paper, the seventh Academic Conference on the Safety of Journalists, jointly organised by the University of the Republic and UNESCO, World Press Freedom Day in Punta del Este, Uruguay},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
In the last ten years, there have been high levels of development of normative work within the United Nations (UN) system on the issue of the safety of journalists. Since the approval of the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity in 2012, the first ever UN strategy on this matter, and the subsequent first Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution on the safety of journalists that same year, fifteen resolutions have been adopted by the principal UN Charter-based bodies, namely the Security Council, the General Assembly and the HRC, and also UNESCO.
The HRC resolutions, which have been adopted on a biennial basis, have proven to be the most progressive in addressing the safety of journalists from a human rights-based perspective. However, the main challenge remains their effective implementation. How have these resolutions evolved and what do they reveal about how the issue of the safety of journalists is addressed by the HRC? What are the shortcomings and gaps in the protection of the safety of journalists offered by this set of resolutions?
To answer these questions, this paper first undertakes a qualitative document analysis of HRC resolutions. It then analyzes the development of these resolutions from a humanrights perspective. Finally, based on this analysis, it identifies the normative gaps that should be addressed in order to properly respond to the most pressing challenges to the safety of journalists in the years to come.
The HRC resolutions, which have been adopted on a biennial basis, have proven to be the most progressive in addressing the safety of journalists from a human rights-based perspective. However, the main challenge remains their effective implementation. How have these resolutions evolved and what do they reveal about how the issue of the safety of journalists is addressed by the HRC? What are the shortcomings and gaps in the protection of the safety of journalists offered by this set of resolutions?
To answer these questions, this paper first undertakes a qualitative document analysis of HRC resolutions. It then analyzes the development of these resolutions from a humanrights perspective. Finally, based on this analysis, it identifies the normative gaps that should be addressed in order to properly respond to the most pressing challenges to the safety of journalists in the years to come.
Appelman, N.; Fahy, R.; van Hoboken, J.
Social Welfare, Risk Profiling and Fundamental Rights: The Case of SyRI in the Netherlands Journal Article
In: JIPITEC, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 257-271, 2021.
@article{nokey,
title = {Social Welfare, Risk Profiling and Fundamental Rights: The Case of SyRI in the Netherlands},
author = {Appelman, N. and Fahy, R. and van Hoboken, J.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/jipitec_2021_4.pdf
https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-12-4-2021/5407},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-12-16},
journal = {JIPITEC},
volume = {12},
number = {4},
pages = {257-271},
abstract = {This article discusses the use of automated decisioning-making (ADM) systems by public administrative bodies, particularly systems designed to combat social-welfare fraud, from a European fundamental rights law perspective. The article begins by outlining the emerging fundamental rights issues in relation to ADM systems used by public administrative bodies. Building upon this, the article critically analyses a recent landmark judgment from the Netherlands and uses this as a case study for discussion of the application of fundamental rights law to ADM systems by public authorities more generally. In the so-called SyRI judgment, the District Court of The Hague held that a controversial automated welfare-fraud detection system (SyRI), which allows the linking and analysing of data from an array of government agencies to generate fraud-risk reports on people, violated the right to private life, guaranteed under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Court held that SyRI was insufficiently transparent, and contained insufficient safeguards, to protect the right to privacy, in violation of Article 8 ECHR. This was one of the first times an ADM system being used by welfare authorities has been halted on the basis of Article 8 ECHR. The article critically analyses the SyRI judgment from a fundamental rights perspective, including by examining how the Court brought principles contained in the General Data Protection Regulation within the rubric of Article 8 ECHR as well as the importance the Court attaches to the principle of transparency under Article 8 ECHR. Finally, the article discusses how the Dutch government responded to the judgment. and discusses proposed new legislation, which is arguably more invasive, with the article concluding with some lessons that can be drawn for the broader policy and legal debate on ADM systems used by public authorities. implications.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This article discusses the use of automated decisioning-making (ADM) systems by public administrative bodies, particularly systems designed to combat social-welfare fraud, from a European fundamental rights law perspective. The article begins by outlining the emerging fundamental rights issues in relation to ADM systems used by public administrative bodies. Building upon this, the article critically analyses a recent landmark judgment from the Netherlands and uses this as a case study for discussion of the application of fundamental rights law to ADM systems by public authorities more generally. In the so-called SyRI judgment, the District Court of The Hague held that a controversial automated welfare-fraud detection system (SyRI), which allows the linking and analysing of data from an array of government agencies to generate fraud-risk reports on people, violated the right to private life, guaranteed under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Court held that SyRI was insufficiently transparent, and contained insufficient safeguards, to protect the right to privacy, in violation of Article 8 ECHR. This was one of the first times an ADM system being used by welfare authorities has been halted on the basis of Article 8 ECHR. The article critically analyses the SyRI judgment from a fundamental rights perspective, including by examining how the Court brought principles contained in the General Data Protection Regulation within the rubric of Article 8 ECHR as well as the importance the Court attaches to the principle of transparency under Article 8 ECHR. Finally, the article discusses how the Dutch government responded to the judgment. and discusses proposed new legislation, which is arguably more invasive, with the article concluding with some lessons that can be drawn for the broader policy and legal debate on ADM systems used by public authorities. implications.
Irion, K.; Kolk, A.; Buri, M.; Milan, S.
Governing “European values” inside data flows: : interdisciplinary perspectives Journal Article
In: Internet Policy Review, vol. 10, no. 3, 2021.
@article{Irion2021e,
title = {Governing “European values” inside data flows: : interdisciplinary perspectives},
author = {Irion, K. and Kolk, A. and Buri, M. and Milan, S.},
url = {https://policyreview.info/european-values},
doi = {10.14763/2021.3.1582},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-10-11},
urldate = {2021-10-11},
journal = {Internet Policy Review},
volume = {10},
number = {3},
abstract = {This editorial introduces ten research articles, which form part of this special issue, exploring the governance of “European values” inside data flows. Protecting fundamental human rights and critical public interests that undergird European societies in a global digital ecosystem poses complex challenges, especially because the United States and China are leading in novel technologies. We envision a research agenda calling upon different disciplines to further identify and understand European values that can adequately perform under conditions of transnational data flows.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This editorial introduces ten research articles, which form part of this special issue, exploring the governance of “European values” inside data flows. Protecting fundamental human rights and critical public interests that undergird European societies in a global digital ecosystem poses complex challenges, especially because the United States and China are leading in novel technologies. We envision a research agenda calling upon different disciplines to further identify and understand European values that can adequately perform under conditions of transnational data flows.
Senftleben, M.
In: 2020, (Chapter in T. Mylly/J. Griffiths (eds.), The Transformation of Global Intellectual Property Protection, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2020, forthcoming.).
@inbook{Senftleben2020b,
title = {From Flexible Balancing Tool to Quasi-Constitutional Straitjacket - How the EU Cultivates the Constraining Function of the Three-Step Test},
author = {Senftleben, M.},
url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3576019},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-04-16},
abstract = {In the international intellectual property (IP) arena, the so-called “three-step test” regulates the room for the adoption of limitations and exceptions (L\&Es) to exclusive rights across different fields of IP. Given the openness of the individual test criteria, it is tempting for proponents of strong IP protection to strive for the fixation of the meaning of the three-step test at the constraining end of the spectrum of possible interpretations. As the three-step test lies at the core of legislative initiatives to balance exclusive rights and user freedoms, the cultivation of the test’s constraining function and the suppression of the test’s enabling function has the potential to transform the three-step test into a bulwark against limitations of IP protection.
The EU is at the forefront of a constraining use and interpretation of the three-step test in the field of copyright law. The configuration of the legal framework in the EU is worrisome because it obliges judges to apply the three-step test as an additional control instrument. It is not sufficient that an individual use falls within the scope of a statutory copyright limitation that explicitly permits this type of use without prior authorization. In addition, judges applying the three-step test also examine whether the specific form of use at issue complies with each individual criterion of the three-step test. Hence, the test serves as an instrument to further restrict L\&Es that have already been defined precisely in statutory law. Not surprisingly, decisions from courts in the EU have a tendency of shedding light on the constraining aspect of the three-step test and, therefore, reinforcing the hegemony of copyright holders in the IP arena.
The hypothesis underlying the following examination, therefore, is that the EU approach to the three-step test is one-sided in the sense that it only demonstrates the potential of the test to set additional limits to L\&Es. The analysis focuses on this transformation of a flexible international balancing tool into a powerful confirmation and fortification of IP protection. For this purpose, the two facets of the international three-step test \textendash its enabling and constraining function \textendash are explored before embarking on a discussion of case law that evolved under the one-sided EU approach. Analyzing repercussions on international lawmaking, it will become apparent that the EU approach already impacted the further development of international L\&Es. Certain features of the Marrakesh Treaty clearly reflect the restrictive EU approach.},
note = {Chapter in T. Mylly/J. Griffiths (eds.), The Transformation of Global Intellectual Property Protection, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2020, forthcoming.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inbook}
}
In the international intellectual property (IP) arena, the so-called “three-step test” regulates the room for the adoption of limitations and exceptions (L&Es) to exclusive rights across different fields of IP. Given the openness of the individual test criteria, it is tempting for proponents of strong IP protection to strive for the fixation of the meaning of the three-step test at the constraining end of the spectrum of possible interpretations. As the three-step test lies at the core of legislative initiatives to balance exclusive rights and user freedoms, the cultivation of the test’s constraining function and the suppression of the test’s enabling function has the potential to transform the three-step test into a bulwark against limitations of IP protection.
The EU is at the forefront of a constraining use and interpretation of the three-step test in the field of copyright law. The configuration of the legal framework in the EU is worrisome because it obliges judges to apply the three-step test as an additional control instrument. It is not sufficient that an individual use falls within the scope of a statutory copyright limitation that explicitly permits this type of use without prior authorization. In addition, judges applying the three-step test also examine whether the specific form of use at issue complies with each individual criterion of the three-step test. Hence, the test serves as an instrument to further restrict L&Es that have already been defined precisely in statutory law. Not surprisingly, decisions from courts in the EU have a tendency of shedding light on the constraining aspect of the three-step test and, therefore, reinforcing the hegemony of copyright holders in the IP arena.
The hypothesis underlying the following examination, therefore, is that the EU approach to the three-step test is one-sided in the sense that it only demonstrates the potential of the test to set additional limits to L&Es. The analysis focuses on this transformation of a flexible international balancing tool into a powerful confirmation and fortification of IP protection. For this purpose, the two facets of the international three-step test – its enabling and constraining function – are explored before embarking on a discussion of case law that evolved under the one-sided EU approach. Analyzing repercussions on international lawmaking, it will become apparent that the EU approach already impacted the further development of international L&Es. Certain features of the Marrakesh Treaty clearly reflect the restrictive EU approach.
Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.
Discrimination, artificial intelligence, and algorithmic decision-making Technical Report
2019.
@techreport{Borgesius2019,
title = {Discrimination, artificial intelligence, and algorithmic decision-making},
author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.},
url = {https://rm.coe.int/discrimination-artificial-intelligence-and-algorithmic-decision-making/1680925d73},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-02-08},
volume = {2019},
abstract = {This report, written for the Anti-discrimination department of the Council of Europe, concerns discrimination caused by algorithmic decision-making and other types of artificial intelligence (AI). AI advances important goals, such as efficiency, health and economic growth but it can also have discriminatory effects, for instance when AI systems learn from biased human decisions. In the public and the private sector, organisations can take AI-driven decisions with farreaching effects for people. Public sector bodies can use AI for predictive policing for example, or for making decisions on eligibility for pension payments, housing assistance or unemployment benefits. In the private sector, AI can be used to select job applicants, and banks can use AI to decide whether to grant individual consumers
credit and set interest rates for them. Moreover, many small decisions, taken together, can have large effects. By way of illustration, AI-driven price discrimination could lead to certain groups in society consistently paying more. The most relevant legal tools to mitigate the risks of AI-driven discrimination are nondiscrimination law and data protection law. If effectively enforced, both these legal tools
could help to fight illegal discrimination. Council of Europe member States, human rights monitoring bodies, such as the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, and Equality Bodies should aim for better enforcement of current nondiscrimination norms. But AI also opens the way for new types of unfair differentiation (some might say discrimination) that escape current laws. Most non-discrimination statutes apply only to discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics, such as skin colour. Such statutes do not apply if an AI system invents new classes, which do not correlate with
protected characteristics, to differentiate between people. Such differentiation could still be unfair, however, for instance when it reinforces social inequality. We probably need additional regulation to protect fairness and human rights in the area of AI. But regulating AI in general is not the right approach, as the use of AI systems is too varied for one set of rules. In different sectors, different values are at stake, and different problems arise. Therefore, sector-specific rules should be considered. More research and debate are needed. },
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
This report, written for the Anti-discrimination department of the Council of Europe, concerns discrimination caused by algorithmic decision-making and other types of artificial intelligence (AI). AI advances important goals, such as efficiency, health and economic growth but it can also have discriminatory effects, for instance when AI systems learn from biased human decisions. In the public and the private sector, organisations can take AI-driven decisions with farreaching effects for people. Public sector bodies can use AI for predictive policing for example, or for making decisions on eligibility for pension payments, housing assistance or unemployment benefits. In the private sector, AI can be used to select job applicants, and banks can use AI to decide whether to grant individual consumers
credit and set interest rates for them. Moreover, many small decisions, taken together, can have large effects. By way of illustration, AI-driven price discrimination could lead to certain groups in society consistently paying more. The most relevant legal tools to mitigate the risks of AI-driven discrimination are nondiscrimination law and data protection law. If effectively enforced, both these legal tools
could help to fight illegal discrimination. Council of Europe member States, human rights monitoring bodies, such as the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, and Equality Bodies should aim for better enforcement of current nondiscrimination norms. But AI also opens the way for new types of unfair differentiation (some might say discrimination) that escape current laws. Most non-discrimination statutes apply only to discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics, such as skin colour. Such statutes do not apply if an AI system invents new classes, which do not correlate with
protected characteristics, to differentiate between people. Such differentiation could still be unfair, however, for instance when it reinforces social inequality. We probably need additional regulation to protect fairness and human rights in the area of AI. But regulating AI in general is not the right approach, as the use of AI systems is too varied for one set of rules. In different sectors, different values are at stake, and different problems arise. Therefore, sector-specific rules should be considered. More research and debate are needed.
credit and set interest rates for them. Moreover, many small decisions, taken together, can have large effects. By way of illustration, AI-driven price discrimination could lead to certain groups in society consistently paying more. The most relevant legal tools to mitigate the risks of AI-driven discrimination are nondiscrimination law and data protection law. If effectively enforced, both these legal tools
could help to fight illegal discrimination. Council of Europe member States, human rights monitoring bodies, such as the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, and Equality Bodies should aim for better enforcement of current nondiscrimination norms. But AI also opens the way for new types of unfair differentiation (some might say discrimination) that escape current laws. Most non-discrimination statutes apply only to discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics, such as skin colour. Such statutes do not apply if an AI system invents new classes, which do not correlate with
protected characteristics, to differentiate between people. Such differentiation could still be unfair, however, for instance when it reinforces social inequality. We probably need additional regulation to protect fairness and human rights in the area of AI. But regulating AI in general is not the right approach, as the use of AI systems is too varied for one set of rules. In different sectors, different values are at stake, and different problems arise. Therefore, sector-specific rules should be considered. More research and debate are needed.
van Eijk, N.; Ryngaert, C.M.J.
Expert Opinion: Legal basis for multilateral exchange of information Technical Report
2018.
@techreport{vanEijk2018f,
title = {Expert Opinion: Legal basis for multilateral exchange of information},
author = {van Eijk, N. and Ryngaert, C.M.J.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Expert_opinion_CTIVD.pdf},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-05-03},
abstract = {Appendix IV to CTIVD report no. 56 to the review report on the multilateral exchange of data on (alleged) jihadists by the AIVD},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
Appendix IV to CTIVD report no. 56 to the review report on the multilateral exchange of data on (alleged) jihadists by the AIVD
van Eijk, N.; Ryngaert, C.M.J.
Deskundigenbericht: Juridische grondslag multilaterale informatie-uitwisseling Journal Article
In: vol. 2018, 2018, (Bijlage IV bij CTIVD rapport nr. 56 over de multilaterale gegevensuitwisseling door de AIVD over (vermeende) jihadisten. Zie ook: https://www.ctivd.nl/actueel/nieuws/2018/03/28/index.).
@article{vanEijk2018e,
title = {Deskundigenbericht: Juridische grondslag multilaterale informatie-uitwisseling},
author = {van Eijk, N. and Ryngaert, C.M.J.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Deskundigenbericht.pdf},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-04-03},
volume = {2018},
note = {Bijlage IV bij CTIVD rapport nr. 56 over de multilaterale gegevensuitwisseling door de AIVD over (vermeende) jihadisten. Zie ook: https://www.ctivd.nl/actueel/nieuws/2018/03/28/index.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
van Eijk, N.; Eijkman, Q.
Enkele kanttekeningen bij de Wiv 2017: De uitbreiding van bevoegdheden getoetst aan mensenrechten Journal Article
In: Justitiële Verkenningen, vol. 2018, no. 1, pp. 99-113, 2018.
@article{vanEijk2018d,
title = {Enkele kanttekeningen bij de Wiv 2017: De uitbreiding van bevoegdheden getoetst aan mensenrechten},
author = {van Eijk, N. and Eijkman, Q.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/JV_2018_1.pdf},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-03-20},
journal = {Justiti\"{e}le Verkenningen},
volume = {2018},
number = {1},
pages = {99-113},
abstract = {Wij presenteren in dit artikel een aantal kanttekeningen bij de Wiv 2017. Dit doen wij door een aantal relevante in Nederland en in de Europese Unie verschenen overkoepelende studies over grondrechten te bespreken. Deze kanttekeningen zijn deels gebaseerd op normatieve uitgangspunten en aanbevelingen uit deze studies, deels ontleend aan nog lopend onderzoek. Gezien de aard en omvang van dit artikel is een selectie gemaakt en beperkt de
analyse zich tot het schetsen van de belangrijkste dilemma’s.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Wij presenteren in dit artikel een aantal kanttekeningen bij de Wiv 2017. Dit doen wij door een aantal relevante in Nederland en in de Europese Unie verschenen overkoepelende studies over grondrechten te bespreken. Deze kanttekeningen zijn deels gebaseerd op normatieve uitgangspunten en aanbevelingen uit deze studies, deels ontleend aan nog lopend onderzoek. Gezien de aard en omvang van dit artikel is een selectie gemaakt en beperkt de
analyse zich tot het schetsen van de belangrijkste dilemma’s.
analyse zich tot het schetsen van de belangrijkste dilemma’s.
McGonagle, T.
“Fake news”: False fears or real concerns? Journal Article
In: Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 203-209, 2017.
@article{McGonagle2017h,
title = {“Fake news”: False fears or real concerns?},
author = {McGonagle, T.},
url = {http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0924051917738685},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0924051917738685},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-12-05},
journal = {Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights},
volume = {35},
number = {4},
pages = {203-209},
abstract = {‘‘Fake news’’ has become a much-used and much-hyped term in the so-called ‘‘post-truth’’ era that we now live in. It is also much-maligned: it is often blamed for having a disruptive impact on the outcomes of elections and referenda and for skewing democratic public debate, with the 2016 US Presidential elections and Brexit referendum often cited as examples. ‘‘Fake news’’ has also been flagged for fuelling propaganda and ‘‘hate speech’’ and even violence. ‘‘Pizzagate’’ is an infamous example of exceptional circumstances in which a false news story had a central role in a shooting incident. In December 2016, a man in Washington D.C. took it upon himself to ‘‘self-investigate’’
a story (a completely unfounded conspiracy theory) that the Hillary Clinton campaign team was running a paedophile ring from the premises of a pizzeria. Shots were fired and he was arrested and charged with assault and related offences. Given all this bad press, it is perhaps little wonder that ‘‘fake news’’ has become a major preoccupation for international organisations, national law- and policy-makers, the media and media actors, civil society and academia. But what exactly is ‘‘fake news’’ and what is all the fuss about? In addressing these questions, this column will also consider historical and contemporary perspectives on the term and its relationship with human rights.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
‘‘Fake news’’ has become a much-used and much-hyped term in the so-called ‘‘post-truth’’ era that we now live in. It is also much-maligned: it is often blamed for having a disruptive impact on the outcomes of elections and referenda and for skewing democratic public debate, with the 2016 US Presidential elections and Brexit referendum often cited as examples. ‘‘Fake news’’ has also been flagged for fuelling propaganda and ‘‘hate speech’’ and even violence. ‘‘Pizzagate’’ is an infamous example of exceptional circumstances in which a false news story had a central role in a shooting incident. In December 2016, a man in Washington D.C. took it upon himself to ‘‘self-investigate’’
a story (a completely unfounded conspiracy theory) that the Hillary Clinton campaign team was running a paedophile ring from the premises of a pizzeria. Shots were fired and he was arrested and charged with assault and related offences. Given all this bad press, it is perhaps little wonder that ‘‘fake news’’ has become a major preoccupation for international organisations, national law- and policy-makers, the media and media actors, civil society and academia. But what exactly is ‘‘fake news’’ and what is all the fuss about? In addressing these questions, this column will also consider historical and contemporary perspectives on the term and its relationship with human rights.
a story (a completely unfounded conspiracy theory) that the Hillary Clinton campaign team was running a paedophile ring from the premises of a pizzeria. Shots were fired and he was arrested and charged with assault and related offences. Given all this bad press, it is perhaps little wonder that ‘‘fake news’’ has become a major preoccupation for international organisations, national law- and policy-makers, the media and media actors, civil society and academia. But what exactly is ‘‘fake news’’ and what is all the fuss about? In addressing these questions, this column will also consider historical and contemporary perspectives on the term and its relationship with human rights.
Fahy, R.
The Chilling Effect of Liability for Online Reader Comments Journal Article
In: European Human Rights Law Review, vol. 2017, no. 4, pp. 387-393, 2017.
@article{Fahy2017b,
title = {The Chilling Effect of Liability for Online Reader Comments},
author = {Fahy, R.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/EHRLR_2017_4.pdf},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-08-24},
journal = {European Human Rights Law Review},
volume = {2017},
number = {4},
pages = {387-393},
abstract = {This article assesses how the European Court of Human Rights has responded to the argument that holding online news media liable for reader comments has a chilling effect on freedom of expression. The article demonstrates how the Court first responded by dismissing the argument, and focused on the apparent lack of evidence for any such chilling effect. The article then argues that the Court has moved away from its initial rejection, and now accepts that a potential chilling effect, even without evidence, is integral to deciding whether online news media should be liable for reader comments. Finally, the article argues that this latter view is consistent with the Court’s precedent in other areas of
freedom of expression law where a similar chilling effect may also arise.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This article assesses how the European Court of Human Rights has responded to the argument that holding online news media liable for reader comments has a chilling effect on freedom of expression. The article demonstrates how the Court first responded by dismissing the argument, and focused on the apparent lack of evidence for any such chilling effect. The article then argues that the Court has moved away from its initial rejection, and now accepts that a potential chilling effect, even without evidence, is integral to deciding whether online news media should be liable for reader comments. Finally, the article argues that this latter view is consistent with the Court’s precedent in other areas of
freedom of expression law where a similar chilling effect may also arise.
freedom of expression law where a similar chilling effect may also arise.
Schulz, W.; van Hoboken, J.
Human rights and encryption Technical Report
2016, ISBN: 9789231001857.
@techreport{Schulz2016,
title = {Human rights and encryption},
author = {Schulz, W. and van Hoboken, J. },
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/human_rights_and_encryption.pdf},
isbn = {9789231001857},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-12-01},
pages = {83 pp.},
publisher = {UNESCO Publishing},
series = {UNESCO Series on Internet Freedom},
abstract = {The study provides an overview of encryption technologies and their impact on human rights. It analyzes in-depth the role of encryption in the media and communications landscape, and the impact on different services, entities and end users. It highlights good practices and examines the legal environment surrounding encryption as well as various case studies of encryption policies. Built on this exploration and analysis, the research provides recommendations on encryption policy that are useful for various stakeholders. These include signaling the need to counter the lack of gender sensitivity in the current debate, and also highlighting ideas for enhancing “encryption literacy”.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
The study provides an overview of encryption technologies and their impact on human rights. It analyzes in-depth the role of encryption in the media and communications landscape, and the impact on different services, entities and end users. It highlights good practices and examines the legal environment surrounding encryption as well as various case studies of encryption policies. Built on this exploration and analysis, the research provides recommendations on encryption policy that are useful for various stakeholders. These include signaling the need to counter the lack of gender sensitivity in the current debate, and also highlighting ideas for enhancing “encryption literacy”.
van der Sloot, B.
The Practical and Theoretical Problems with 'Balancing': Delfi, Coty and the Redundancy of the Human Rights Framework Journal Article
In: Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, no. 3, pp. 439-459., 2016.
@article{vanderSloot2016,
title = {The Practical and Theoretical Problems with 'Balancing': Delfi, Coty and the Redundancy of the Human Rights Framework},
author = {van der Sloot, B.},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1811},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-07-14},
journal = {Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law},
number = {3},
pages = {439-459.},
abstract = {In the realm of privacy and data protection \textendash as in the fundamental rights framework in general \textendash balancing has become the standard approach for dealing with legal disputes. It comes, however, with a number of practical and theoretical problems. Th is article analyses those problems and compares the method of balancing with the original approach of most human rights frameworks, such as the European Convention on Human Rights. It does so by analysing two cases in detail: the European Court of Human Right’s case Delfi v. Estonia and the Court of Justice of the EU’s judgment Coty v. Stadtsparkasse. From this analysis, it follows that the concept of balancing signals a shift away from the deontological and towards a utilitarian understanding of fundamental rights. Th is is not only of theoretical importance, as it could also mean that in time, human rights frameworks as such might become redundant.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
In the realm of privacy and data protection – as in the fundamental rights framework in general – balancing has become the standard approach for dealing with legal disputes. It comes, however, with a number of practical and theoretical problems. Th is article analyses those problems and compares the method of balancing with the original approach of most human rights frameworks, such as the European Convention on Human Rights. It does so by analysing two cases in detail: the European Court of Human Right’s case Delfi v. Estonia and the Court of Justice of the EU’s judgment Coty v. Stadtsparkasse. From this analysis, it follows that the concept of balancing signals a shift away from the deontological and towards a utilitarian understanding of fundamental rights. Th is is not only of theoretical importance, as it could also mean that in time, human rights frameworks as such might become redundant.
E.J. Dommering
Annotatie bij EHRM 11 maart 2014 (Jelsevar e.a./ Slovenië) Miscellaneous
2016.
@misc{,
title = {Annotatie bij EHRM 11 maart 2014 (Jelsevar e.a./ Sloveni\"{e})},
author = {E.J. Dommering},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1770},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-05-13},
journal = {NJ},
number = {16/17},
abstract = {
Klacht naar aanleiding van roman waarin klagers hun familie en moeder herkenden. Afweging door nationale rechter tussen persoonlijkheidsrechten en artistieke vrijheid redelijk. Belang artistieke vrijheid en getuigenverklaringen. Kennelijk ongegrond en niet-ontvankelijk.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}
Klacht naar aanleiding van roman waarin klagers hun familie en moeder herkenden. Afweging door nationale rechter tussen persoonlijkheidsrechten en artistieke vrijheid redelijk. Belang artistieke vrijheid en getuigenverklaringen. Kennelijk ongegrond en niet-ontvankelijk.
van der Sloot, B.
2015, (
In: S. Gutwirth et al. (eds.), <a href="http://www.springer.com/us/book/9789401773751#aboutBook" target="_blank"><em>Data Protection on the Move</em></a>, Law, Governance and Technology Series 24, 2016.
).
@misc{,
title = {Is the Human Rights Framework Still Fit for the Big Data Era? A Discussion of the ECtHR's Case Law on Privacy Violations Arising from Surveillance Activities},
author = {van der Sloot, B.},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1701.pdf},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-12-15},
abstract = {
Human rights protect humans. This seemingly uncontroversial axiom might become quintessential over time, especially with regard to the right to privacy. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights grants natural persons> a right to complain, in order to protect their individual interests, such as those related to personal freedom, human dignity and individual autonomy. With Big Data processes, however, individuals are mostly unaware that their personal data are gathered and processed and even if they are, they are often unable to substantiate their specific individual interest in these large data gathering systems. When the European Court of Human Rights assesses these types of cases, mostly revolving around (mass) surveillance activities, it finds itself stuck between the human rights framework on the one hand and the desire to evaluate surveillance practices by states on the other. Interestingly, the Court chooses to deal with these cases under Article 8 ECHR, but in order to do so, it is forced to go beyond the fundamental pillars of the human rights framework.
},
note = {
In: S. Gutwirth et al. (eds.), \<a href="http://www.springer.com/us/book/9789401773751#aboutBook" target="_blank"\>\<em\>Data Protection on the Move\</em\>\</a\>, Law, Governance and Technology Series 24, 2016.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}
Human rights protect humans. This seemingly uncontroversial axiom might become quintessential over time, especially with regard to the right to privacy. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights grants natural persons> a right to complain, in order to protect their individual interests, such as those related to personal freedom, human dignity and individual autonomy. With Big Data processes, however, individuals are mostly unaware that their personal data are gathered and processed and even if they are, they are often unable to substantiate their specific individual interest in these large data gathering systems. When the European Court of Human Rights assesses these types of cases, mostly revolving around (mass) surveillance activities, it finds itself stuck between the human rights framework on the one hand and the desire to evaluate surveillance practices by states on the other. Interestingly, the Court chooses to deal with these cases under Article 8 ECHR, but in order to do so, it is forced to go beyond the fundamental pillars of the human rights framework.
N.A.N.M. van Eijk; E.J. Dommering
Onvoldoende waarborgen in het kader van national veiligheid Miscellaneous
2015.
@misc{,
title = {Onvoldoende waarborgen in het kader van national veiligheid},
author = {N.A.N.M. van Eijk and E.J. Dommering},
url = {http://njb.nl/highlights/onvoldoende-waarborgen-in-het-kader-van-nationale.18644.lynkx},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-12-10},
abstract = {
In Nederland is tot dusver in het politieke debat over het noodzakelijke onafhankelijke toezicht op de inlichtingen en veiligheidsdiensten het Europese recht genegeerd of verkeerd uitgelegd. Met het Europese recht bedoelen wij zowel het EU Handvest als het Europees Verdrag voor de Rechten van de Mens. Dat is op grond van meerdere rechterlijke uitspraken niet langer mogelijk.
},
note = {
Opinie op NJB blog, 9 december 2015.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}
In Nederland is tot dusver in het politieke debat over het noodzakelijke onafhankelijke toezicht op de inlichtingen en veiligheidsdiensten het Europese recht genegeerd of verkeerd uitgelegd. Met het Europese recht bedoelen wij zowel het EU Handvest als het Europees Verdrag voor de Rechten van de Mens. Dat is op grond van meerdere rechterlijke uitspraken niet langer mogelijk.
Tsoutsanis, A.
Back to Black: justice.cn Journal Article
In: Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, no. 10, pp. 725., 2015, (
Editorial.
).
@article{,
title = {Back to Black: justice.cn},
author = {Tsoutsanis, A.},
url = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2667516},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-10-15},
journal = {Journal of Intellectual Property Law \& Practice},
number = {10},
pages = {725.},
abstract = {
This short - peer reviewed - article touches on innovation in China in the field of smart phones, recent legislative reform in China for fostering intellectual property and combating counterfeit and trade mark grabbing. It also touches on human rights in China, the different approach in which the West advances its economic v human rights agenda and the selective way Silicon Valley industry participates in grass roots debate on civil liberties. The article also touches on the 'right to seek counsel' as one of the fundamental rights, which many arrested lawyers in China were deprived of during the July 2015 arrests.
},
note = {
Editorial.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This short - peer reviewed - article touches on innovation in China in the field of smart phones, recent legislative reform in China for fostering intellectual property and combating counterfeit and trade mark grabbing. It also touches on human rights in China, the different approach in which the West advances its economic v human rights agenda and the selective way Silicon Valley industry participates in grass roots debate on civil liberties. The article also touches on the 'right to seek counsel' as one of the fundamental rights, which many arrested lawyers in China were deprived of during the July 2015 arrests.
Eskens, S.; van Daalen, O.; van Eijk, N.
Ten standards for oversight and transparency of national intelligence services Technical Report
Instituut voor Informatierecht 2015.
@techreport{,
title = {Ten standards for oversight and transparency of national intelligence services},
author = {Eskens, S. and van Daalen, O. and van Eijk, N.},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1591.pdf},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-07-23},
institution = {Instituut voor Informatierecht},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
Nieuwenhuis, A.
Annotatie bij EHRM 9 februari 2012 (Vejdeland / Sweden) Miscellaneous
2013, (
<a href="http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-114416"><span style="color:#b22222;">Uitspraak</span></a>
).
@misc{,
title = {Annotatie bij EHRM 9 februari 2012 (Vejdeland / Sweden)},
author = {Nieuwenhuis, A.},
year = {2013},
date = {2013-03-28},
journal = {European Human Rights Cases},
number = {5},
pages = {1062-1069},
note = {
\<a href="http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-114416"\>\<span style="color:#b22222;"\>Uitspraak\</span\>\</a\>
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}
A.J. Nieuwenhuis
The protection of artistic expression under article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights Journal Article
In: Kunst und Recht, no. 3/4, pp. 110-116, 2013.
@article{,
title = {The protection of artistic expression under article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights},
author = {A.J. Nieuwenhuis},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/393.pdf},
year = {2013},
date = {2013-03-28},
journal = {Kunst und Recht},
number = {3/4},
pages = {110-116},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
A.J. Nieuwenhuis
Annotatie bij EHRM 13 juli 2012 (Mouvement Raëlien / Suisse) Miscellaneous
2013.
@misc{,
title = {Annotatie bij EHRM 13 juli 2012 (Mouvement Ra\"{e}lien / Suisse)},
author = {A.J. Nieuwenhuis},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_EHRC_2012_10.pdf},
year = {2013},
date = {2013-03-28},
journal = {European Human Rights Cases},
number = {10},
pages = {2334-2372},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}
(Ed.)
Met Europese verdrag voor Mensenrechten is niets mis Periodical
2011.
@periodical{,
title = {Met Europese verdrag voor Mensenrechten is niets mis},
author = {E.J. Dommering and R. Lawson and J. Peters and A.W. Hins},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Volkskrant_11april2011.pdf},
year = {2011},
date = {2011-04-19},
booktitle = {De Volkskrant},
abstract = {
De vier auteurs stellen dat critici van het EVRM niet alleen juridisch dwalen, maar ook de feiten verdraaien. De uitgangspunten van dit verdrag gelden vandaag nog precies zo als tijdens de invoering daarvan. Dit verdrag is nog steeds niet overbodig.
},
note = {
11 april 2011.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {periodical}
}
De vier auteurs stellen dat critici van het EVRM niet alleen juridisch dwalen, maar ook de feiten verdraaien. De uitgangspunten van dit verdrag gelden vandaag nog precies zo als tijdens de invoering daarvan. Dit verdrag is nog steeds niet overbodig.
A.J. Nieuwenhuis
Kunst in Straatsburg: Een analyse van de jurisprudentie van het EHRM Journal Article
In: Mediaforum, no. 3, pp. 70-78., 2010.
@article{,
title = {Kunst in Straatsburg: Een analyse van de jurisprudentie van het EHRM},
author = {A.J. Nieuwenhuis},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Mediaforum_2010_3.pdf},
year = {2010},
date = {2010-10-14},
journal = {Mediaforum},
number = {3},
pages = {70-78.},
abstract = {
Het EHRM heeft zich meermalen over zaken gebogen, waarin vormen van artistieke expressie als boeken, films en schilderijen een hoofdrol spelen. In sommige gevallen blijkt het Hof een gerede bescherming te geven; in andere zaken acht het Hof een inmenging al snel toelaatbaar. De vraag dringt zich dan ook op of er gesproken kan worden van een eenduidige bescherming van artistieke expressie.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Het EHRM heeft zich meermalen over zaken gebogen, waarin vormen van artistieke expressie als boeken, films en schilderijen een hoofdrol spelen. In sommige gevallen blijkt het Hof een gerede bescherming te geven; in andere zaken acht het Hof een inmenging al snel toelaatbaar. De vraag dringt zich dan ook op of er gesproken kan worden van een eenduidige bescherming van artistieke expressie.
T. McGonagle
Annotatie, The Islamic Headscarf Dilemma (Leyla Sahin / Turkey) Miscellaneous
2010.
@misc{,
title = {Annotatie, The Islamic Headscarf Dilemma (Leyla Sahin / Turkey)},
author = {T. McGonagle},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/727.pdf},
year = {2010},
date = {2010-04-28},
journal = {Irish Human Rights Law Review},
number = {1},
pages = {195-215},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}
T. McGonagle
Annotatie, An Ode to Contextualisation Miscellaneous
2010.
@misc{,
title = {Annotatie, An Ode to Contextualisation},
author = {T. McGonagle},
url = {http://www.claruspress.ie/shop/the-irish-human-rights-law-review-2010/},
year = {2010},
date = {2010-04-24},
journal = {Irish Human Rights Law Review},
number = {1},
pages = {237-251},
note = {
Deze annotatie is toegankelijk via de website van het tijdschrift: http://www.claruspress.ie/shop/the-irish-human-rights-law-review-2010/
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}
T. McGonagle
Council of Europe approaches and legal developments under the European Convention on Human Rights Presentation
20.07.2005.
@misc{,
title = {Council of Europe approaches and legal developments under the European Convention on Human Rights},
author = {T. McGonagle},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/IHRCpaperJune2005.pdf},
year = {2005},
date = {2005-07-20},
abstract = {Dit artikel geeft een overzicht en een korte analyse van de benaderingen van de Raad van Europa in de strijd tegen racisme. Ook worden de relevante juridische ontwikkelingen in het kader van het Europees Verdrag voor de Rechten van de Mens besproken. Het artikel onderzoekt in het bijzonder de interactie tussen de doelstellingen van anti-racisme, anti-discriminatie/pro-gelijkheid en de vrijheid van meningsuiting.
},
note = {Presentatie tijdens de ronde tafelbespreking, "Combating racially motivated crime and hate crimes through legislation", georganiseerd door de Irish Human Rights Commission en Amnesty International (Irish section) in samenwerking met de [Irish] National Consultative Committee on Racism and Interculturalism, Dublin Castle, Ierland, 8 juni 2005.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {presentation}
}
Dit artikel geeft een overzicht en een korte analyse van de benaderingen van de Raad van Europa in de strijd tegen racisme. Ook worden de relevante juridische ontwikkelingen in het kader van het Europees Verdrag voor de Rechten van de Mens besproken. Het artikel onderzoekt in het bijzonder de interactie tussen de doelstellingen van anti-racisme, anti-discriminatie/pro-gelijkheid en de vrijheid van meningsuiting.
T. McGonagle
Achieving global alliance against racism’ Journal Article
In: Metro Éireann, no. 6, 2001.
@article{,
title = {Achieving global alliance against racism’},
author = {T. McGonagle},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/MetroEireannOct.html},
year = {2001},
date = {2001-12-09},
journal = {Metro \'{E}ireann},
number = {6},
abstract = {
Dit korte artikel stelt dat het effect van de VN Wereldconferentie tegen Racisme aanzienlijk zal zijn, maar nog enige tijd op zich laat wachten.
},
note = {
Special Supplement on the World Conference Against Racism.
Metro \'{E}ireann is een nieuwsblad dat maandelijks verschijnt, gericht op de behoeftes en belangen van immigranten in Ierland.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Dit korte artikel stelt dat het effect van de VN Wereldconferentie tegen Racisme aanzienlijk zal zijn, maar nog enige tijd op zich laat wachten.