Browse

The EU Citizenship Directive defines the right of free movement for citizens of the European Economic Area. It applies to EU citizens and their family members who move to visit or reside in another Member State. This might at first seem like a straightforward definition, but immediately questions arise. Who determines if a person is an EU citizen at all? What about dual citizens of two Member States, or of one Member State and a non-Member State (a ‘third State’)? What is the position of EU citizens who move to one Member State, and then return to their home Member State? This book provides a comprehensive commentary of the EU’s Citizens’ Directive tracing the evolution of the Directive’s provisions, placing each article in its historical and legislative context. Special emphasis is placed on highlighting the connections and interactions between the Directive’s constituent provisions so as to permit a global appreciation of the system of free movement rights to which the Directive gives effect. Each provision is annotated containing a detailed analysis of the case law of the Court of Justice as well as of related measures impacting upon the Directive’s interpretation including European Commission reports and guidelines on the Directive’s implementation.

This book explores the interface between European data protection and the freedom of expression activities of traditional journalism, professional artists, and both academic and non-academic writers from both an empirical and normative perspective. It draws on an exhaustive examination of both historical and contemporary public domain material and a comprehensive questionnaire of European Data Protection Authorities (DPAs). Empirically it is found that, notwithstanding an often confusing statutory landscape, DPAs have sought to develop an approach to regulating the journalistic media based on contextual rights balancing. However, they have struggled to secure a clear and specified criterion of strictness as regards standard-setting or a consistent and reliable approach to enforcement. DPAs have appeared even more confused as regards other traditional publishers, largely abstaining from regulating most professional artists and writers but attempting to subject all academic disciplines to onerous statutory restrictions established for medical, scientific, and related research. From these findings, it is argued that balancing contextual rights has value and should be both generalized across all traditional publishers and systematically and sensitively developed through structured and robust co-regulation. Such co-regulation should adopt the new code of conduct and monitoring provisions included in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) as a broad guideline. DPAs should accord strong deference to any codes and monitoring bodies which verifiably meet the accredited criteria but must engage more proactively when these are absent. In any case, DPAs should also intervene directly as regards particularly serious or systematic issues and have an increasingly important role in ensuring a joined-up approach between traditional publishing and new media activity.