Jakulevičienė, Lyra

Šiame darbe siekiama įvertinti teisės į gyvybę bei teisės į tapatumą sąveiką su naujosiomis technologijomis, identifikuojant pagrindines rizikas žmogaus teisėms ir laisvėms bei galimus jų sprendimo būdus skaitmeninėje erdvėje. Darbe nagrinėjami tarptautiniai teisės šaltiniai, moksliniai straipsniai, įvairi literatūra. Pažymėtina, kad egzistuojančio teisinio reguliavimo skaitmeninei erdvei tarptautiniu lygmeniu nepakanka. Darbe pateikiami atliktos apklausos rezultatai ir analizė pagrindžianti taip pat ir visuomenės poreikį didesniam skaitmeninės erdvės tesiniam reguliavimui.

This dissertation examines reservations to international human rights treaties as one of the most contentious issues in international treaty law, exposing the tension between state sovereignty and universal human rights protection. It critically assesses the decentralized reservation regime under the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, demonstrating that the “object and purpose” test remains insufficiently defined and that the state objection mechanism operates ineffectively in the human rights context. Through analysis of reservations to key instruments, the study identifies systemic weaknesses: widespread religion and culture-based reservations, politically driven objection practices, and the non-binding character of treaty body determinations. Empirical review of state practice demonstrates that objections rarely produce meaningful change without sustained civil society pressure. The dissertation’s innovative contribution proposes the use of artificial intelligence to enhance monitoring and transparency, including automated tracking, natural language processing, and multilingual databases for identifying potentially incompatible reservations, whilst preserving the primacy of human legal judgement. Reform proposals include clarifying the “object and purpose” standard, strengthening institutional oversight, and integrating AI-supported monitoring with appropriate ethical safeguards.

This thesis examines the evolution and effectiveness of Human Rights and Environmental Due Diligence (HREDD) mechanisms in the European Union, focusing on the transition from soft law to mandatory legal frameworks. It analyzes the French Loi de Vigilance (LdV) and the German Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz (LkSG), comparing their approaches to corporate liability and public enforcement. The LdV introduces a civil liability regime, while the LkSG relies on administrative oversight through the Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control (BAFA). Both laws aim to hold corporations accountable for human rights and environmental violations in their supply chains, but their effectiveness is limited by procedural hurdles, jurisdictional ambiguities, and inconsistent enforcement. The Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) represents the EU’s attempt to harmonize these mechanisms, combining public and private enforcement. It expands the scope of due diligence obligations, mandates stakeholder engagement, and introduces civil liability for non-compliance. However, the Omnibus I package significantly weakens the CSDDD by narrowing its scope, reducing stakeholder involvement, and eliminating harmonized civil liability rules. These amendments prioritize business simplification over victim access to remedies, undermining the directive’s potential to ensure corporate accountability. The thesis argues that the Omnibus I package compromises the CSDDD’s effectiveness by creating legal uncertainty, reducing transparency, and limiting enforcement tools. It concludes that while the CSDDD initially offered a robust framework for HREDD, the amendments risk turning it into a symbolic compliance exercise rather than a transformative tool for corporate responsibility. Future reforms should prioritize harmonization, stakeholder inclusion, and stronger enforcement mechanisms to align with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and ensure meaningful access to remedies for victims.

The New Pact on Migration and Asylum was adopted to establish a unified European framework for managing migration and asylum within the EU, aiming to better address the arrival of migrants on EU territory. The Pact introduced new elements, including a flexible but mandatory solidarity mechanism to ensure fair responsibility-sharing among Member States, harmonised rules for examining asylum applications, and measures to handle emergency situations involving large arrivals of third-country nationals. However, these new rules risk violating fundamental rights of asylum seekers and migrants, such as the right to liberty, the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to asylum. Meanwhile, the diverse strategies among Member States in the preparation of the Pact’s implementation threaten to fragment the Common European Asylum System.

This thesis undertakes to evaluate the EU legal response to the issues that new technologies cause to freedom of expression. It outlines the key phenomena associated with these technologies and their impact on the exercise of this fundamental right, before questioning the adequacy and effectiveness of the EU’s legal safeguards. Thus, the aim of this research is to assess to what extent the EU legal tools are capable of protecting the exercise of freedom of expression in a context where new technologies both expand and limit it. The research finds that current regulatory instruments, including the DSA, the DMA, the AI Act and the GDPR are still insufficient to defend freedom of expression as traditionally guaranteed under the European fundamental rights framework. It shows that these tools address the effects rather than the underlying causes of the problem and therefore, do not constitute a sufficient protection against limitations imposed by private companies and States. As a result, this analysis points out the need for an ethical and shared governance model to face the structural restrictions that shape freedom of expression.

Magistro baigiamajame darbe sistemiškai analizuojami EŽTT jurisprudencijoje taikomo EŽTK 4 protokolo 4 straipsnio atvejai, atskleidžiant šio teismo praktikai būdingą minėto straipsnio taikymo specifiką, tendencijas, taip pat identifikuojama šio straipsnio taikymo raidą. Darbe sisteminama ir bandoma išsiaiškinti EŽTK 4 protokolo 4 straipsnio taikymo apimtis EŽTT naujausioje praktikoje, o taip pat lyginami EŽTK 4 protokolo 4 straipsnio taikymo atvejai ir EŽTK 3 straipsnio bei Chartijos 19 straipsnio taikymo apimtys. Atsižvelgiant į naujausiose EŽTT bylose nustatytų sąlygų kontekstą, taip pat atliekama Lietuvos-Baltarusijos 2021 m. įvykusios pasienio situacijos analizė. Pirmoje baigiamojo darbo dalyje atskleidžiama EŽTK 4 protokolo 4 straipsnio kilmė, sąvoka, santykis su kitais EŽTK straipsniais bei ES Pagrindinių teisių chartija. Antroje dalyje nagrinėjama EŽTK 4 protokolo 4 straipsnio taikymo EŽTT praktikoje raida ir plėtra. Trečioje dalyje vertinami Lietuvos-Baltarusijos pasienyje 2021 m. įvykę įvykiai kolektyvinio užsieniečių išsiuntimo draudimo kontekste remiantis EŽTT praktika.

The COVID-19 pandemic created an international threat to public health. States to fully realise the protective mechanisms, limited the implementation of certain HRs. The research is dedicated to the analysis of the impact of the anti-pandemic measures adopted in different states on HRs. Mainly, on the right to mental health protected under the right to health, and the right to freedom of movement. In addition, the legal issues caused by the restrictions of free movement, as one of the most restricted right during the pandemic, have been examined. The methods used allowed to assess the impact of the restrictions on the right to mental health, and the right to freedom of movement, indicate the common problems in the responses to COVID-19 and to the previous diseases’ outbreaks, and estimate if the cases of unjustified restrictions’ implementation or enforcement can be traced during the COVID-19 pandemic. The work discloses the areas of a specific concern which need more precise regulation in general, as well as during the health emergencies, and suggests, inter alia, the ways of improvement of the preparedness and response strategies.

Issues of protection by mechanisms of the International Law of migrant children is particularly relevant today because the numbers of migrant children are growing each year significantly. Master thesis “Migrant Children in the Context of Child Rights Convention” is devoted to the examining of the role of the Convention on the Rights of the Child as one of the essential instrument of protecting migrant children’s rights in the International Law through a comprehensive analysis of the relevant articles of the Convention and legal problems related to them. The Convention on the Rights of the Child contains a complete list of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights that migrant children have and requires states to protect this category of children as the most vulnerable. The Convention on the Rights of the Child guarantees the right of migrant children to family reunification, effectively protects refugee and asylum-seeking children as a separate group of migrant children and limits the immigration detention of children what is always contrary to their best interests. Master thesis “Migrant Children in the Context of Child Rights Convention” is divided into general and specific parts, which provide logical argumentation that the Convention on the Rights of the Child is an crucial protective instrument of migrant children in International Law. Conclusions and recommendations illustrate the effectiveness of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in the legal regulation of migrant children.

There is a marked increase in the number of migrants and asylum-seekers in Europe in recent years. Such tendency leads to an increasing number of appeals to international institutions. This becomes a particular challenge for national and international (European) justice, as this may provoke conflicts of law in courts’ practice. Originating from two different European legal orders, the European Court of Human Rights together with the Court of Justice of the European Union plays a crucial role in the protection of the fundamental rights of migrants and asylum-seekers. While some of the approaches of these courts may intertwine, others may cause legal gaps or uncertainty. Therefore, it is essential to understand to what extent the level of human rights protection in these two courts coincides. This Master’s Thesis is focused on how the two European courts coexist in terms of migration and asylum, what are the trends in the migration-related jurisprudence of these two courts, and what role the courts play in the legal system of Ukraine.

Dublin system has always been subjected to certain level of criticism regarding its contradictory nature with human rights legislations such as ECHR. Being based on the principle of mutual trust and cooperation, the regulation does take into account differences in economic and political positions in Member states. Prohibition of torture, inhuman or other degrading treatment in the Dublin III Regulation is expressed through the Article 4 CFREU, which corresponds to the general spirit of the Article 3 ECHR, having the same meaning and protecting equal human rights. Article 3 RCHR consistently provides that prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment is one of the most fundamental and non-derogable human rights, even though certain degree of unclarity can be found while analyzing the text of the article. A more detailed analysis of the Strasbourg and Luxembourg Courts case law shows that in practice the prohibition of torture is subject to inconsistent interpretations that require the States to balance between the jurisprudence of the above mentioned institutions, being parties to both the ECHR and CFREU. The introduction of the Draft Proposal for the Dublin IV Regulation was hoped to balance the inconsistencies in the practices of the CJEU and ECtHR and combat the situation of expulsions to unsafe third countries, however, it is rather questionable whether the changes proposed will be able to improve the situation in the nearest future.