Valutytė, Regina

This doctoral thesis examines the implementation of EU Climate Law through the analysis of competence allocation, legal coherence and consistency, and governance within the EU. Focusing on Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 establishing the objective of climate neutrality by 2050, the study explores how binding climate targets reshape the vertical and horizontal distribution of powers between the Union, its institutions, and the Member States. Although EU Climate Law does not formally alter the principle of conferral, its dense regulatory framework significantly constrains national discretion and strengthens the significant role of the European Commission in steering, monitoring, and enforcing climate action. Its implementation challenges traditional institutional balances and contributes to a form of polycentric governance marked by power concentration, fragmented accountability, and uneven implementation. Based on a doctrinal analysis of EU law, climate litigation, and the Union’s external commitments—particularly within the WTO framework—the thesis argues for a recalibration of EU climate governance and proposes the creation of an independent European Climate Network to enhance expertise, coordination, and accountability, while preserving the constitutional balance of the Union.

This master’s thesis seeks to determine the substance of a European approach to personal data protection and national security. To do so, it investigates the sources of personal data law able to influence at a European scale: the Council of Europe and the European Union. As national security remains within the States' competencies, the first part consists of the study of the limitations that European States have to confront when acting for national security, and more precisely, the limitations made to defend personal data protection. In doing so, this research analyses and compares the case laws of the ECtHR and of the CJEU. Hence, if the first part of this master’s thesis analyses the conflictual exchanges between national security and personal data protection, the second part analyses how the two concepts can be defended together. To do so, the second part focuses on the defence from foreign influence within democratic elections. Indeed, the link with the subject is that foreign influence on EU democratic processes can be realised by processing data of EU citizens, to influence them for the benefit of foreign entities. This processing of data tends notably to vastly disinform and target influenceable voters. The European Parliament called to act, qualifying it as a threat to “national security” in a resolution from June 1, 2023.

The EU’s diplomatic cyber strategy is an important demonstration of its concern and responsiveness with regards disastrous cyber-attacks. In light of the new threats cyber-attacks represent for the economy and democracy, the EU institutions and member states decided to establish a cyber resilience instrument as part of its CFSP. Therefore, in 2017 the Cyber Diplomacy Toolbox was adopted with the aim of ensuring stable, peaceful and secure cyberspace in the EU. Among the five instruments provided by the Cyber Diplomacy Toolbox, the most notable is the legal framework for restrictive measures against cyber-attacks stemming from Decision 2019/797 and Regulation 2019/796. Undeniably, considering the cyberwar context, the Cyber Diplomacy Toolbox, and in particular the cyber sanctions regime, appears to be a most needed instrument within the EU’s cyber deterrence strategy. However, its contribution is merely symbolic. This ensues mostly from both the CFSP’s intergovernmental nature and the anonymous character of cyberspace which represent a hurdle to the adoption of a cyber sanction.

Asmens duomenų tvarkymo teisminio bendradarbiavimo baudžiamosiose bylose ir policijos bendradarbiavimo srityse nuostatos įtvirtintos ES Direktyvoje 2016/680. Tyrimu buvo siekiama atskleisti biometrinių duomenų sampratą, išanalizuoti EŽTT ir ESTT praktiką biometrinių duomenų tvarkymo teisėsaugos tikslais kontekste bei atlikti Teisinės apsaugos įstatymo nuostatų analizę dėl biometrinių duomenų tvarkymo nacionalinėse duomenų bazėse įvertinant Direktyvos 2016/680 teisinio reglamentavimo ypatumus. Tyrimo tikslas buvo įvertinti biometrinių duomenų tvarkymo nacionalinėse duomenų bazėse atitiktį biometrinių duomenų tvarkymo apsaugos standartams, įtvirtintiems Europos žmogaus teisių konvencijoje ir Europos Sąjungos teisei. Tyrimas padėjo atskleisti Direktyvos 2016/680 perkėlimo į nacionalinę teisę netikslumus identifikuojant teisinio reglamentavimo spragas dėl biometrinių duomenų tvarkymo valstybės valdomose duomenų bazėse.

Šiuo magistriniu darbu siekiama atskleisti kosminių išteklių gavybos ir naudojimo reguliavimo objekto sąvoką bei egzistuojantį tarptautinio reglamentavimo poreikį. Pateikiamos konstruktyvios rekomendacijos dėl kosmoso išteklių, kaip teisinių santykių reguliavimo objekto, sąvokos apibrėžimo. Naujausi technologiniai pasiekimai kosminiame sektoriuje akivaizdžiai sufleruoja, kad netolimoje ateityje kosminių išteklių gavyba bus realus procesas. Kadangi tarptautinės teisės normos kosminių išteklių sąvokos neapibrėžia ir toks procesas nėra Kosmoso sutarties reguliavimo dalykas, bus analizuojamas JAV nacionalinis įstatymas ir KIV Gidas. Siekiu atskleisti sąvokos kosminiai ištekliai pagrindinius požymius ir egzistuojančia problematiką sietiną su bendros naudos ir Kosmoso nepriklausomumo principais bus analizuojami ir kitų mokslininkų pozicijos sąvokos formavimo klausimu. Analizės metu atskiras dėmesys kreipiamas į Atsakomybės konvencijos nuostatas susijusias su „atsakingos valstybės“ ir „kosmoso objekto“ sąvokomis. Galiausiai prieinant prie išvados, kad nesant sutarimo dėl kosmoso išteklių apibrėžimo tarptautinėje bendruomenėje, negali būti užtikrinami Res Communis Omniumir Res extra commercium principai.

Dissertation “Jurisdictional interaction between the CJEU and international dispute settlement bodies: EU law perspective” aims to systematically analyse the extent of the normative influence of the principle of autonomy of the EU legal order on delimitation of the CJEU’s jurisdiction from jurisdictions of selected international dispute settlement bodies, which fall outside the scope of dispute settlement mechanisms provided under the EU Treaties. Seeking this purpose the content of the principle of autonomy of the EU legal order established in the CJEU’s cases related to jurisdictional delimitation is revealed as well as the principle’s influence on European integration. Within the context of the application of the principle of autonomy, two recent controversial decisions of the CJEU in Achmea and Opinion 1/17 are analysed. First, it is scrutinised how the principle of autonomy is applied in respect of investment arbitral tribunals established under intra-EU BITs and whether responses of these tribunals to the CJEU’s case law reflect any risks for the autonomy of EU law. Secondly, it is assessed if the Investment Court System mechanism, established in the EU’s treaty with Canada, could have adverse effects on the autonomy of the EU legal order.

The dissemination of false information represents today a major challenge, not because of the novelty of the phenomenon, but because of the novelty of its reach and consequences on the State security and integrity. This research aims at analysing the best ways to fight the phenomenon of spreading false information, by understanding what it is and analysing if there a systematically uniform attitude of the different Member States of the European Union to counter it and if not, whether the European Union can step in. For this purpose, a first part established the characteristics of the phenomenon of disseminating false information and determine the best terminology to reflect properly the phenomenon. The second part elaborates on the possibility of a State to use the principle of State integrity to block foreign content (online or broadcast) while respecting the freedom of expression and the relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Three different legislations – French, German and Lithuanian – are compared in order to determine if they have a uniform and efficient approach and to examine their compliance with the ECHR. Finally, the third part analyse the possibility and opportunity of a European Union approach, by assessing the existing legal framework. The main finding is that the European Union should establish a common framework regarding the definition and responsibility of the platform providers in order to tackle efficiently the dissemination of intended false information, as the national approaches are insufficient and may impair the digital single market.

This paper presents a comparison of Belgium, British and French’s Passenger Name Record (PNR) systems with the European Union (EU) rules, guided by the EU PNR Directive. This directive was adopted in spring 2016, leading to a mandatory transposition in the national systems at the latest on the 25th of May 2018. Such a system allows to collect and use air passengers’ data in order to prevent, detect, investigate or even prosecute terrorist offences or serious crimes. The main goal of the thesis is to highlight the differences between the EU and national rules, in order to help solving them to be in compliance with the EU framework. To do so, the comparative method is the most used, also combined with the descriptive one, in order to first present each system independently. The analysis shows that the Belgium system, created in light with the EU PNR Directive as a real transposition law, is the closest to the EU framework and in compliance with the EU rules. However the French and British systems, which were created before the Belgium and EU rules, have some discrepancies, which need to be changed in order to comply with the EU PNR Directive.

Nuolat augantis terorizmo išpuolių ir tarptautinio nusikalstamumo lygis paskatino naujus technologinius išradimus visuomenėje panaudoti kovojant su šiuo tarpvalstybiniu reiškiniu. Keleivių duomenų įrašo (PNR) duomenys šiuo metu vertinami kaip vienas iš pagrindinių įrankiu kovoje su teroristiniais nusikaltimais ir sunkiais tarptautiniais nusikaltimais. Po 9/11 išpuolių Amerikoje tokios šalys kaip JAV, Kanada ir Australija pradėjo reikalauti, kad oro vežėjai, atvykstantys į jų teritorijas pateiktų PNR duomenis. Todėl, kad būtų laikomasi šalių nustatytų reikalavimų, ir stiprinti tarptautinį bendradarbiavimą kovojant su terorizmu ir sunkiais tarptautiniais nusikaltimais ES sudarė susitarimus dėl Europos Sąjungos surinktų PNR duomenų naudojimo ir perdavimo su JAV, Kanada ir Australija. Nors duomenų ir privatumo apsauga dažnai buvo vertinama kaip kliūtis įgyvendinant priemones veiksmingai kovai su terorizmu, tai buvo labai svarbu siekiant užtikrinti pagrindinių demokratinių vertybių priežiūrą. Vertinant dvi stiprias priešingas jėgas, norą palaikyti pusiausvyrą tarp visuomenės saugumo ir pagrindinės teisės visiems apsaugoti savo privatumą ir savo asmeninius duomenis, buvo nustatyta, kad visi PNR susitarimai viršija tai, kas būtina užtikrinti visuomenės saugumą. Todėl yra nesuderinama su Chartijos 7, 8 ir 52(1) straipsniais. Taigi, dvišaliai PNR susitarimai kuriuos ES sudarė su Kanada, JAV ir Australija yra nesuderinamas su ES pirminė teise, todėl yra negaliojantys.

The Master thesis analyze the influence that the principle of autonomy, forming part of the EU law constitutional doctrine, has on the reasoning and status of CJEU while performing the reception of international law. It is aimed to indicate by what means the principle of autonomy is implemented within EU legal order in the field of external relations and what influence it has on the CJEU’s approach in the cases where the questions of application of the sources of international law are involved. The research has shown that the principle of autonomy of EU legal order significantly influences the reception of the sources of international law. The possibility to grant international legal sources an effect within EU legal order is made a subject to a restrictive conditions that are difficult to fulfill. By checking whether the sources of international law meets the conditions of autonomy protection CJEU acts similarly as a national constitutional court.