Building up the “Accountable Ulysses” model. The impact of GDPR and national implementations,ethics, and health-data research: Comparative remarks

The paper illustrates obligations emerging under articles 9 and 89 of the EU Reg. 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation, hereinafter “GDPR”) within the health-related data processing for research purposes. Furthermore, through a comparative analysis of the national implementations of the GDPR on the topic, the paper highlights few practical issues that the researcher might deal with while accomplishing the GDPR obligations and the other ethical requirements. The result of the analyses allows to build up a model to achieve an acceptable standard of accountability in health-related data research. The legal remarks are framed within the myth of Ulysses.     

On defense of “ethification” of law: How ethics may improve compliance with the EU digital laws

In recent years, academics and professionals witness the rise of the “ethification” of law, specifically in the area of ICT law. Ethification shall be understood as a proliferation of moral principles and moral values in the legal discourse within the areas of research, innovation governance, or directly enforceable rules in the industry. Although the ethical considerations may seem distant from mere regulatory compliance, the opposite is true. The article focuses on the positive side of the “ethification” of digital laws through the lens of legal requirements for impact assessments pursuant to General Data Protection Regulation and conformity assessments in the proposal for the Artificial Intelligence Act. Authors argue that ethical considerations are often absent in the context of using new technologies including artificial intelligence, yet they may provide additional value for organizations and society as a whole. Additionally, carrying out ethics-based assessments is already in line with existing regulatory requirements in the fields of data protection law and proposed EU AI regulation. These arguments are reflected in the context of facial recognition technology, where both data protection impact assessment under the EU General Data Protection Regulation and conformity assessment under the proposal of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act will be mandatory. Facial recognition technology is analyzed through the ethics-based assessment involving stakeholder analysis, data flows map, and identification of risks and respective countermeasures to show additional insights that ethics provides beyond regulatory requirements.     

欧盟461/2004反倾销规则研究

2004年3月,欧盟颁布了461/2004反倾销规则,该规则是对欧盟现行反倾销基本条例的最新补充.该规则对欧盟原反倾销法律实体和程序方面进行的修改,充分体现了近年来国际上关于反倾销立法的潮流:反倾销作为WTO允许的贸易保护手段,其立法既应保证反倾销措施能有效地得以实施也应不断保持透明度.欧盟461/2004反倾销规则在这方面值得包括中国在内的其他WTO成员国借鉴.     

Bite the Bullet

This paper discusses the Fedon case‐law of the European Court of Justice (Court of Justice), which involved a claim for compensation by Fedon (an Italian producer of eyeglass cases) from the EU for the imposition of World Trade Organization (WTO)‐authorised retaliatory trade barriers by the USA following the failure by the EU to comply with an adverse ruling by the WTO regarding its import regime for bananas. As a result of the EU non‐compliance, European banana distributors and some bananas producers benefited from WTO‐illegal protection, at the expense of a set of EU exporters, including Fedon, that were hit by US countermeasures. Fedon contested the non‐compliance by the EU before the Court of Justice and sought compensation. This paper assesses the ruling of the Court of Justice against Fedon and argues that the Court got it wrong, both in terms of legal principle and as a matter of legal technicalities.     

Exploring Definitions of Serious Crime in EU Policy Documents and Academic Publications: A Content Analysis and Policy Implications

In recent years the term “serious crime” has gained prominence in EU policy on internal security. This article analyzes how the EU policy and scientific communities have conceptualized and operationalized the term. Through a content analysis, it evaluates the articulation and use of “serious crime” in EU policy documents published from 1995–2013 and scientific articles published from 2004–13 that include the term (n?=?93 and n?=?104, respectively). The analysis demonstrates deficits of conceptualization and operationalization and a correspondingly weak foundation for policy. While the EU’s increasing emphasis on serious crime could represent an opportunity to improve the accountability of EU crime control policies, it is up to academics and policy-makers to address these deficits.     

The uncertain future of data retention laws in the EU: Is a legislative reset possible?

The article discusses the CJEU's most important case law, including interpretations presented in recent cases relating to data retention for both national security purposes (Privacy International, La Quadrature du Net) and the fight against serious crime (H.K). The analysis is a starting point for discussing the draft e-Privacy Regulation, in particular a controversial proposal introduced by the EU Council that may limit the Court's jurisdiction in cases involving data retention rules that cover state security.Negotiated over the past five years, the draft e-Privacy Regulation fleshes out EU data protection rules governing electronic communication services. As a result, the way in which obligations under the Regulation are defined is critical in setting a standard for retention rules consistent with CJEU case law for decades to come. At the same time, succumbing to pressure from Member States may have the opposite result – the emergence of new ambiguities concerning not only the admissibility of data retention but also the competence of EU institutions to regulate this area of the telecommunications sector.     

The Lack of Dissent in WTO Dispute Settlement

This article analyses in detail the fact that there has beenalmost no dissent in World Trade Organization (WTO) disputesettlement reports. Only a handful of articles have noted thisphenomenon, even in passing. The article first examines theempirical data with respect to dissenting and concurring opinionsat both the panel and Appellate Body levels. Fewer than 5% ofpanel reports and 2% of Appellate Body reports contain separateopinions of any kind. Second, it shows that the WTO is in factactively discouraging dissents and discusses why this mightbe the case. The article argues that dissents are valuable ingeneral and assesses whether more dissents would be a positivefor the WTO. It then reviews the few dissents that have beenpublished and demonstrates that 50% of the arguments raisedin dissents at the panel level were adopted in whole or in parton appeal by the Appellate Body, thus illustrating dissentscan and do make a difference. The article concludes that keepingthe lid on dissents may ultimately erode the strength of thedispute settlement system and hinder the ability of the WTOMembers to make appropriate changes to the Agreements.     

从“印度诉欧盟关税歧视案”看WTO普惠制的公正性——专家小组和上诉机构裁决之比较分析

自从联合国贸易发展委员会制定"授权条款",允许发达国家对发展中国家实行"普遍、非歧视、非互惠"的优惠关税制度以来,还很少有发展中国家针对普惠制待遇提起诉讼。2002年,印度针对欧盟委员会第2501/2001号法案中的"反毒品激励措施"提起了诉讼,此案经历了专家小组的审理以及上诉机构的复审,最后印度胜诉。案件虽然于2004年5月由上诉机构作出最终裁决,但是由于"授权条款"本身规定的模糊性使得案件的争点较多,专家小组和上诉机构在案件的审理上存在的诸多不同观点,也凸显出了此案的复杂性。而本案非常重要的一个结果就是:导致了欧盟在新出台的980/2005号法案中废除了"反毒品激励措施",并且修改了"特殊激励措施"’的相关规定。本文通过对印度诉欧盟关税歧视案的介绍和分析,借以阐明WTO争端解决机构对普惠制体系中存在的问题的权威看法。     

The thin red line: Refocusing data protection law on ADM,a global perspective with lessons from case-law

This article explores existing data protection law provisions in the EU and in six other jurisdictions from around the world - with a focus on Latin America - that apply to at least some forms of the processing of data typically part of an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system. In particular, the article analyzes how data protection law applies to “automated decision-making” (ADM), starting from the relevant provisions of EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Rather than being a conceptual exploration of what constitutes ADM and how “AI systems” are defined by current legislative initiatives, the article proposes a targeted approach that focuses strictly on ADM and how data protection law already applies to it in real life cases. First, the article will show how GDPR provisions have been enforced in Courts and by Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) in the EU, in numerous cases where ADM is at the core of the facts of the case considered. After showing that the safeguards in the GDPR already apply to ADM in real life cases, even where ADM does not meet the high threshold in its specialized provision in Article 22 (“solely” ADM which results in “legal or similarly significant effects” on individuals), the article includes a brief comparative law analysis of six jurisdictions that have adopted general data protection laws (Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, China and South Africa) and that are visibly inspired by GDPR provisions or its predecessor, Directive 95/46/EC, including those that are relevant for ADM. The ultimate goal of this study is to support researchers, policymakers and lawmakers to understand how existing data protection law applies to ADM and profiling.¹     

反倾销中的归零问题探析

自WTO成立以来,针对反倾销调查中实施归零法的争端解决案件屡见不鲜。在2001年多哈回合反倾销规则改革谈判中,归零问题也是重要议题之一。由于《反倾销协定》未就归零问题做出明确规定,导致了成员对归零法本身的可诉性和合法性产生意见分歧,专家组和上诉机构也难以对此取得一致意见。运用法律解释的方法,结合WTO争端解决案例,分析了归零法的法律性质,得出归零法本身和适用均具有可诉性并且在反倾销各个阶段实施归零均属于违反WTO反倾销规则的结论。最后,结合反倾销规则谈判现状,指出仅凭WTO争端解决机构的裁判结果不能根本解决归零问题,终结归零法必须通过对现行WTO反倾销规则进行修改。     

中美知识产权"刑事门槛"争端的法律问题

In April 2007, the United States filed an application with the DSB of WTO with respect to the issue of criminal law protection mechanism of intellectual property rights in China, which was the first dispute accepted by the DSB arising out of the issue of criminal law protection mechanism of intellectual property rights. The core of the dispute of the case is how to interpret the “commercial scale” under Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement as the “criminal threshold”. It can be seen from the practice of the interpretation of the DSB that while each WTO member is entitled to interpret the term “commercial scale”, the boundary of interpretation is subject to Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement. It is unnecessary for China to lower her “criminal threshold”, since China’s criminal law protection in intellectual property policy is in compliance with the TRIPS Agreement. In fact, the United States should change from lowering the criminal threshold to how to strengthen the criminal crackdown on piracy under the circumstance of lowering the price of genuine works when imposing pressure on China in the protection of intellectual property rights. He Xiaoyong, Ph.D, is presently a professor in the Faculty of International Law in the University of East China University of Political Science and Law. He studied as a visiting scholar at the University of San Francisco (2001). He was awarded a Chevening Scholarship in 2002 sponsored by British Council and Shanghai Outstanding Teacher Award in 2004. He has released more than 80 academic articles on WTO issues and international financial law, and his monographs include Legal Aspects on Supervision under Financial Globalization (2002), International Trade Dispute Settlement and China’s Perspective: Under the WTO framework (2006) and new issues under the WTO (2008).     

反倾销法上的最佳可获信息规则初探

反倾销法上的最佳可获信息规则（BIA）有其存在的合理性，但客观上对出口方不公平；WTO立法对BIA做出了指导性和原则性规定，DSB的实践对该规则有所发展和引伸；欧美的BIA要求十分详细，适用条件明确，欧盟的规定在文字上更接近WTO；中国的BIA已有制度和实践基础，需要进一步完善。     

美国《1930年关税法》修改的法律观察

美国近日修改《1930年关税法》授权美国商务部对以中国为代表的所谓"非市场经济国家"征收反补贴税,是对来自中国的进口产品新一轮贸易保护主义的表现。WTO规则并未禁止对"非市场经济国家"反补贴,因此美国此次修法并不违反其在WTO项下的义务,但美国如果对来自中国的产品按照"非市场经济国家"使用替代国方法进行"双反"救济,依据WTO争端解决上诉机构"对来自中国的产品的反补贴和反倾销措施"报告,将很可能违反WTO协定的"适当金额"要求,构成双重救济。中国当前最重要的是积极应对现实的"双反"调查,而长远的目标则是争取美国对中国完全市场经济地位的承认。     

‘Look to yourselves,that we lose not those things which we have wrought.’ What do the proposed changes to the purpose limitation principle mean for public bodies' rights to access third-party data?

This article analyses the proposed changes to the purpose limitation principles contained in the draft Data Protection Regulation adopted by the European Commission in January 2012. It examines the historical motives for the introduction of the principle as part of the 1995 Data Protection Directive, and looks at the constitutional framework under which it operates both at EU and member state level. It considers the risks and long-term consequences that EU citizens may face if the principle is eroded or substantially abandoned.     

世贸组织上诉机构与欧洲法院司法能动之比较——为什么慎谈世贸组织“司法宪法化”

关于世界贸易组织以及欧洲联盟"宪政"的关注度日见高涨,其中,不乏将"司法造法"视为世贸组织制度"宪法化"引擎"的"司法宪法化"学说。但在政府间国际组织内谈论"宪政",不得不保持审慎的态度。比较世界贸易组织上诉机构澄清规则、填补规则、引入规则的司法能动,与欧洲法院的实践有本质的不同,其能动性的发挥有显著的特殊性,不得不区别对待、具体分析。     

RACE,RACIAL THREAT,AND SENTENCING OF HABITUAL OFFENDERS*

As legislatures proliferate novel “enhancements” to criminal sentencing, such as “three-strikes” and related provisions, and as criminologists debate their effects, the role of existing enhancements, such as habitual offender statutes, has received little empirical attention. This article explores the effect of race in the decision to prosecute and sentence eligible defendants as “habitual” offenders. During FY 1992–93, 9,690 males admitted to prison in Florida were statutorily eligible (two prior felony convictions or one prior violent felony conviction) for sentencing as “habitual” offenders. Approximately 20% received that disposition. They will serve at least 75% of their enhanced sentence as compared with the state average of about 40%. Logistic regression, controlling for prior record, crime seriousness, and other relevant factors, shows a significant and substantial race effect. The disadvantage of black defendants is particularly strong for drug offenses and for property crimes that have relatively high victimization rates for whites (larceny, burglary). Race is less consequential for violent and weapons-related crimes. Race effects are more often significant in sentencing contexts that are low in terms of percent black, racial income inequality, drug arrest rates, and violent crime rates. The relevance of these findings for a “racial threat” interpretation of sentencing outcomes is discussed.     

Democratising the separation of powers in EU government: The case for presidentialism

The EU, while not a state, can be conceived as a mixed or compound political system. Capturing its character of separation of powers has implications for understanding what the EU polity is, but also should be, not least from a democratic standpoint. Hence, the article addresses the EU as system of government in order to identify one appropriate path of democratisation. It first revisits separation of powers and the typology of parliamentary and presidential government to delineate criteria for categorising horizontal (i.e. between branches) division‐of‐powers arrangements. To this end, it elaborates in particular the criteria proposed by Steffani which allow for a more parsimonious differentiation between types of governments. Subsequently, the EU polity (e.g. its structure and functioning of separation of powers and “checks and balances”) is assessed regarding its conformity to a government type. Finally, I discuss implications for identifying a more certain point of reference for an approach to democratise EU government that is not only institutionally compatible, but also ‘demos enabling’.     

CHINA’S WTO PARTICIPATION IN ANTI-DUMPING DISPUTES (2001–2011)

The anti-dumping war between the US and China has attracted much attention lately, especially after a March WTO ruling and a November US domestic court ruling on the issue in 2011. While the former held that the current US method of applying countervailing and anti-dumping duties simultaneously on imports from China and other non-market economies was “inconsistent” with the WTO rules, the latter ruled that such action was “illegal” under the US countervailing law. China has been one of the most frequent anti-dumping investigation targets by both developed and developing countries for decades. Although it currently has more than one hundred anti-dumping actions against its trading partners at the domestic level, China is a very new player of anti-dumping litigation at the WTO level. China filed its first WTO claim on anti-dumping in December 2007 against the US, since when it has made frequent appearance at the WTO dispute settlement in this regard. This Article examines China’s participation in anti-dumping disputes during the first ten years of its WTO membership, five as complainant and four as respondent. The alleged undervalued Chinese currency has been claimed to provide unfair price advantages to Chinese products and consequently tops trade frictions between China and its trading partners. It to some extent contributes to the rising anti-dumping disputes of China. With the continuing pressure to appreciate the Chinese currency globally as well as the current debit crisis in the EU, more anti-dumping and countervailing investigations against China are expected to emerge as countries are pushing more exports to assist the gloomy domestic economies. This becomes more likely taking into account the mounting claims on the job lost in the US due to the flux of cheap and competitive Chinese products.     

WTO规则下单边贸易保护措施实施的条件——关贸总协定第二十条第二款之适用

随着全球生态环境问题的兴起和可持续发展战略的提出,经济、社会和生态环境的协调发展逐渐为人们所重视.虽然主张贸易自由化的WTO仍强调,应站在传统贸易优先的立场上,通过国际协作,禁止缔约方采取单边贸易措施的方法以达到全球环境保护的目的,但上诉机构对虾-海龟案的最终裁决表明,单边环境措施可以同贸易规则相调和.本文试图通过WTO上诉机构关于金枪鱼案、汽油案和虾-海龟案裁决,以及对<欧盟捕猎夹法规>的比较分析,讨论关贸总协定第二十条第二款之适用.     

“In the public interest”: The privacy implications of international business-to-business sharing of cyber-threat intelligence

This article reports on preliminary findings and recommendations of a cross-discipline project to accelerate international business-to-business automated sharing of cyber-threat intelligence, particularly IP addresses. The article outlines the project and its objectives and the importance of determining whether IP addresses can be lawfully shared as cyber threat intelligence.The goal of the project is to enhance cyber-threat intelligence sharing throughout the cyber ecosystem. The findings and recommendations from this project enable businesses to navigate the international legal environment and develop their policy and procedures to enable timely, effective and legal sharing of cyber-threat information. The project is the first of its kind in the world. It is unique in both focus and scope. Unlike the cyber-threat information sharing reviews and initiatives being developed at country and regional levels, the focus of this project and this article is on business-to-business sharing. The scope of this project in terms of the 34 jurisdictions reviewed as to their data protection requirements is more comprehensive than any similar study to date.This article focuses on the sharing of IP addresses as cyber threat intelligence in the context of the new European Union (EU) data protection initiatives agreed in December 2015 and formally adopted by the European Council and Parliament in April 2016. The new EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) applies to EU member countries, a major focus of the international cyber threat sharing project. The research also reveals that EU data protection requirements, particularly the currently applicable law of the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC (1995 Directive) (the rules of which the GDPR will replace in practice in 2018), generally form the basis of current data protection requirements in countries outside Europe. It is expected that this influence will continue and that the GDPR will shape the development of data protection internationally.In this article, the authors examine whether static and dynamic IP addresses are “personal data” as defined in the GDPR and its predecessor the 1995 Directive that is currently the model for data protection in many jurisdictions outside Europe. The authors then consider whether sharing of that data by a business without the consent of the data subject, can be justified in the public interest so as to override individual rights under Articles 7 and 8(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which underpin EU data protection. The analysis shows that the sharing of cyber threat intelligence is in the public interest so as to override the rights of a data subject, as long as it is carried out in ways that are strictly necessary in order to achieve security objectives. The article concludes by summarizing the project findings to date, and how they inform international sharing of cyber-threat intelligence within the private sector.