Search

Humanity is vividly witnessing the loss of life, the massive destruction, and human rights violations due to new authoritarian regimes and protracted wars that have intensified in the last few decades, particularly in countries of the Global South. Such conflictual situations have also resulted in devastating attacks against academic institutions and values and, in turn, the displacement of scholars, mainly to neighbouring countries and to Europe. In a pressing situation involving the radical disruption of scientists' social and academic lives in their homelands, international support networks, the history of which goes back to the 1920s, could quickly respond to the scholars' urgent needs. This paper analyzes the impacts of this recent migration flow of scholars on 'academic humanitarianism' in Europe, which is a form of humanitarianism and a regime of governing that emerged at the intersection of humanitarianism and academia. While analyzing the changing nature of this regime, the paper focuses on governing discourses, technologies, and strategies of the following organisations: Cara (UK), PSI (Germany), and PAUSE (France). It concludes that the flow of scholars from the countries of the Global South to Europe has resulted in important changes in their humanitarian approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Algorithmic decision-making and other types of artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to predict who will commit crime, who will be a good employee, who will default on a loan, etc. However, algorithmic decision-making can also threaten human rights, such as the right to non-discrimination. The paper evaluates current legal protection in Europe against discriminatory algorithmic decisions. The paper shows that non-discrimination law, in particular through the concept of indirect discrimination, prohibits many types of algorithmic discrimination. Data protection law could also help to defend people against discrimination. Proper enforcement of non-discrimination law and data protection law could help to protect people. However, the paper shows that both legal instruments have severe weaknesses when applied to artificial intelligence. The paper suggests how enforcement of current rules can be improved. The paper also explores whether additional rules are needed. The paper argues for sector-specific – rather than general – rules, and outlines an approach to regulate algorithmic decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The quality of parliamentary process has been a relevant factor for the European Court of Human Rights in a number of recent judgments. This article asks: to what extent could the technical purpose for assessing parliamentary process – margin of appreciation and/or proportionality analysis – structure the assessment? The analysis combines study of the court’s practice with theory on the margin of appreciation and the proportionality test. Four cases are selected to represent different ways in which parliamentary process has been dealt with by the court:Animal Defenders Internationalv.UK;Sukhovetskyyv.Ukraine;Lindheimv.Norway; andParrillov.Italy. The main argument is that the court has been hazy about the technical purpose that reference to parliamentary process is serving in its reasoning. This has affected the coherence of reasoning within cases and the development of a general doctrine on the assessment of parliamentary process. Judges interested in the legitimacy of the court and in favour of placing value in parliamentary process should work towards clearer explanation of the technical purpose it serves within the court’s reasoning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Legal consideration of extraterritorial obligations contained in the European Convention on Human Rights have largely developed in respect of military occupation or the custodial control of individuals. For a number of reasons situations involving transnational cooperation have received little judicial scrutiny. This article examines human rights concerns associated with the rapidly expanding field of transnational education, an activity frequently reliant on inter-state cooperation. By re-examining the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the legal obligations of countries engaged in public activity overseas are explored. The analysis is structured around a case study on the oversight of a European education facility affected by Bahrain's controversial response to pro-reform protests. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]