4

Reports on the EU Digital Services Act
I continue to analyse the proposed EU Digital Services Act as it is being debated in the EU legislature. So far, I have published the following reports: ‘The Digital Services Act and Small and Medium Enterprises as users of online services’ (EPICENTER policy brief, 13 October 2021).
The Great Transatlantic Data Disruption
with Kristian Stout (Director of Innovation Policy, International Center for Law & Economics) and Michael Mandel (Vice President and Chief Economist, Progressive Policy Institute) The full text of the paper can be downloaded here.
Regulating for Cybersecurity
in Polish, with Maciej Troć The full text of the report (in Polish) can be downloaded here. This report gives on overview of the problem of cybersecurity and discusses four models of regulation aimed at improving cybersecurity relevant for Poland and the European Union.
How to Protect Consumer Privacy and Data Security in the Age of 5G?
with Fred Roeder Published in Brazilian Portuguese (Pedro Gonet Branco tr) as ‘Como proteger a privacidade do consumidor e a segurança de dados na era do 5g?’ (2019) 16 Revista dos Estudantes de Direito da Universidade de Brasília (RED|UnB)
The Core Issue in Miller: The Relevance of Section 1 of the 1972 Act

The legal controversy in the Miller case may now be distilled in the following way. The government argues that it has a general power to withdraw from treaties, which it certainly does. The claimants argue that the executive does not have a power to frustrate a statute, which it certainly does not. The government argues that Parliament legislated in 1972 (and afterwards) against the background of a settled practice that the power of the Crown to withdraw from treaties is untrammelled. The claimants respond that there was never such a treaty as the set of EU Treaties and hence the previous practice is irrelevant.

This paper suggests that the correct interpretation of s. 1 of the European Communities Act 1972 [‘ECA’] strengthens the government position in Miller. The paper does so by explaining the legislative choice expressed in s. 1 ECA with the aid of the clear interpretative statements made in Parliament by government representatives during the legislative work on what became the ECA.