Mediaboss Marketing

The European commission is taking legal action against Hungary at the European court of justice (ECJ), escalating a longstanding dispute over the countrys anti-LGBT laws. This is an unprecedented step for the EU, but it isnt a sure win for LGBT rights in Europe and even has the potential to endanger them.

Hungary (under Prime Minister Viktor Orbns leadership) and the EU have been at odds for years over the wider issue of the rule of law. This intensified in 2021 when Hungary adopted a new law banning the depiction or promotion of LGBT-related material to minors. Commission president Ursula von der Leyen called it a shame that goes against all the fundamental values of the European Union.

In July 2021, the commission launched official infringement procedures against Hungary for failing to implement and comply with EU law. Later in the year, it also froze Hungarys access to the COVID recovery fund. Unsatisfied with Hungarys responses, the commission has now escalated the matter and referred the matter to the ECJ. This is the first time the EU has taken a member state to court over LGBT rights.

In recent decades, Europe has seen an increase in the use of homophobia to score political points. Examples include the manif pour tous demonstrations against same-sex marriage in France, and Croatias referendum to constitutionally define marriage as a heterosexual union. Hungarys law has also inspired other countries, like Romania, to try and ban so-called homosexual propaganda.

The outcome of this case could have far-reaching consequences for LGBT rights in Europe. In effect, the commission is asking the court to enshrine LGBT rights as part of the EUs fundamental values, on a par with other principles such as freedom of movement.

Perhaps by taking legal action, the commission is enacting its own LGBTIQ equality strategy, launched in 2020. However, the commissions claims frame the case as a breach of the EUs internal market rules, rather than LGBT rights. This should not come as a surprise the EU has very few direct laws on LGBT rights. By framing the case around core EU rules, the commission has a stronger chance of succeeding. In the past, the court has ruled on LGBT rights by invoking other fundamental EU principles.

The EU claims that by enacting this law, Hungary is violating both the EU charter of fundamental rights and Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.

Here is where the case becomes interesting. Although the charter of fundamental rights has clauses that explicitly protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation, it only applies to Hungary when it is implementing EU directives. Article 2, on the other hand, has much broader applicability, but does not refer to LGBT rights at all. By submitting this court case to the ECJ, the commission is not only asking the court to determine when EU rules have primacy over member state rules but also to clarify that the rather ambiguously defined European values explicitly include LGBT rights.

There are three possible outcomes of this case.

First, the ECJ could rule (for the first time) that the values outlined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union also include LGBT rights. This would be the more activist ruling going beyond established case law for a more political statement. Hungary would then be required to adjust the law and remove its discriminatory nature. More widely, this would also be a watershed moment in European LGBT politics it would not only provide a strong mandate for the commission to take bolder steps on LGBT rights, but it might also lead to more challenges of discriminatory laws across Europe.

Second, in a (unlikely) doomsday scenario, the ECJ could side with Hungary. This would provide nearly free rein for anti-LGBT actors in Hungary, and across the EU more widely, to enact more homophobic laws. This would leave the gains made in the last 50 years for LGBT people in Europe on shaky ground.

Finally, in the most likely scenario, the ECJ would deliver a ruling that sits somewhere in between. Based on previous case law, we might expect that the ECJ would rule that the Hungarian law violates EU rules, but only to the extent where the law has cross-border implications. In this scenario, the ECJ ruling would signal to Hungary (and other countries) that is it acceptable to discriminate against homosexuality, as long as they are smart in their wording.

Such a ruling would not clearly and unequivocally clarify that LGBT equality is a fundamental EU value, but rather leave LGBT rights as a secondary principle, subject to the more established EU principles of the internal market and freedom of movement. This would create ambiguity as to when homophobic laws are a matter of member state policy, or when the EU has to (or can) intervene, giving homophobic governments license to enact more laws like Hungarys.

Read the original:
EU sues Hungary over anti-gay law what it could mean for LGBT rights in Europe - The Conversation

Patients in Europe who have multiple myeloma and have received at least 1 previous therapy can now receive treatment with selinexor plus bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone following its full marketing authorization by the European Commission.

The European Commission has granted full marketing authorization to selinexor (Nexpovio) plus bortezomib (Velcade) and low-dose dexamethasone (SVd) for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma following treatment with at least 1 previous therapy, according to a press release from Karyopharm Therapeutics.1

The decision has converted the regimens conditional marketing authorization to a full approval, marking the second approval for selinexor in the European Union. The European Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use gave a positive opinion of the combination following readout of findings from the phase 3 BOSTON trial (NCT03110562), which indicated that once weekly SVd yielded a significant reduction in the risk of disease progression or death vs twice weekly Vd (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.53-0.93; P = .0075).2

The European Commissions approval of an expanded use of [selinexor] provides another option for patients with multiple myeloma who have relapsed or become resistant to current treatment regimens, Richard Paulson, president and chief executive officer of Karyopharm, said in a press release. Our decision to pursue approval for this patient population is indicative of our commitment to expand access to selinexor across the globe and we look forward to working closely with Menarini who will commercialize Nexpovio in Europe.

The FDA approved SVd as a treatment option for multiple myeloma following 1 prior therapy in December 2020 based on results from the BOSTON trial.3

Read more here:
Full Marketing Authorization Granted to Selinexor Combo by European Commission for Pretreated Multiple Myeloma - Cancer Network

The European Union (EU) wants crypto trading to stop being a chaotic mess. EU negotiators published a provisional agreement that marks the blocs first rules regarding tracing transfers of crypto assets, clamping down on illicit transfers and suspicious transactions.

Despite what the crypto bros will tell you, cryptocurrency is not the safest investment on the market right now. In fact, not only is it one of the most volatile places to put your money in, but its also riddled with scams. But this doesnt mean that crypto cant play a role in our economy just that it needs to be more closely regulated. At least thats what the European Union believes.

Perhaps the most important part of the legislation is something that would force crypto trading platforms to store more data about transactions. When a crypto asset is passed from one person to another, information on both the sender and the receiver would have to be stored by the trading platforms if the amount is larger than the equivalent of 1,000 euros, and companies would be forced to hand this information over to authorities investigating things like funding terrorists or money laundering. This would subject cryptocurrency transfers to the same money-laundering rules as traditional banking transfers, aligning crypto transfers with normal money transfers. The rules wont affect tokens without issuers, like bitcoin.

The European Securities and Markets Authority also announced that the new rules, known as Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA), will force trading platforms to warn consumers about the risk of losses associated with trading digital tokens.

This would also help protect some of the less savvy traders. When the lockdown came in, a new crowd of people went into trading, and while some people have made money with crypto, others have lost fortunes, either due to market prices, or due to scams. Many people new to trading didnt even know what they were buying they were doing copy trading or other automated trades, with little oversight.

For too long, crypto-assets have been under the radar of our law enforcement authorities, one of the lead EU lawmakers negotiating the rules, Assita Kanko, said in a statement. It will be much harder to misuse crypto-assets and innocent traders and investors will be better protected.

The decision was also fueled by concerns over consumer protection, especially as the value of bitcoin, the worlds largest cryptocurrency, has plunged more than 70% from its all-time high in a matter of months. A so-called stablecoin (a cryptocurrency where the price is designed to be pegged to a cryptocurrency) called TerraUSD imploded virtually overnight, erasing an estimated $40 billion in investor funds with no accountability.

This is just the first step in a sweeping package that aims to introduce a number of oversight measures and place some firm principles on the wild west of crypto trading. Additional measures are expected to be presented in the following weeks, but the whole package will be finished 18 months from now.

The effects of this move are expected to spill outside the continent and potentially become a global standard. Just like how the EUs data privacy policy became the norm in many other parts of the world, the new crypto regulations are expected to be influential on other continents. Smaller countries that could find it difficult to draft legislation of this magnitude may also adopt and implement the packages (with minor tweaks).

But the EU will have a hard problem harmonizing the law between different countries. While Germany, for instance, has been very proactive in requiring companies that facilitate crypto assets on behalf of clients to take special precautions and obtain a specific license, other European countries have virtually no crypto legislation.

The measure was in the work for some time, but it was also accelerated by Russias invasion of Ukraine. As the sanctions against Russia broaden, the possibility of using crypto for evading sanctions also becomes more pressing, and EU legislators want to make sure that Russia cant use crypto to keep funding its war.

Ultimately, its unsurprising that the EU wants a more conservative and responsible approach toward cryptocurrencies. The downside is that this will hamper the growth and ease of use of cryptos, but could provide a healthy, durable framework on which to ensure that cryptocurrencies finally have a positive effect in society instead of just making money for some people and losing money for others.

Go here to read the rest:
The European Union wants to regulate the Wild West of crypto trading - ZME Science

Mario Draghi has agreed to stay on as a caretaker prime minister for Italy. Elections are scheduled for September. Andreas Solaro/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

Mario Draghi has agreed to stay on as a caretaker prime minister for Italy. Elections are scheduled for September.

Italian officials and voters alike are mulling over Prime Minister Mario Draghi's resignation last week and experts say it's for good reason.

Draghi was appointed to office in February 2021. For the past year and a half, Draghi has been heralded for his role in leading Italy out of a health and economic crisis. Many hoped for Draghi's guidance as Europe faces soaring inflation and Russia wages war against Ukraine.

He's been credited for restoring Italy's economy and reputation. Now, experts warn that both hang in the balance as uncertainty grows in Italy and Europe at-large.

"Mario Draghi was such a trusted pair of hands across Europe," said Christopher Way, an associate professor in government at Cornell University who specializes in European politics. "He was so respected for his competence that it's a loss no matter who replaces him."

Italy is slated to hold early elections on Sept. 25, but it will likely take several additional months before a new coalition government is formed. (Back in 2018, it took 90 days after parliamentary elections for a new government to be sworn in.) Until then, Draghi has agreed to stay in office as a temporary caretaker at President Sergio Mattarella's request.

Known as the national unity government, various parties throughout the spectrum of Italian politics joined together in response to the pandemic. For a while, the government had a rare period of stability, according to Way.

But that didn't last long with the government's term originally set to expire spring 2023. Way said party leaders began jockeying for position in advance of the election next year, which is why parliamentary infighting started.

It all came to a head this month as Draghi tried to rally support for a key relief bill, designed to help consumers and industries with soaring energy costs.

The populist 5-Star Movement refused to back the bill, raising concerns about how a new garbage incinerator for Rome may affect the environment. Then, the League, a far-right group, and Forza Italia, a center-right party, followed suit and refused to support the prime minister.

Although Draghi was still widely favored by the president and several groups in his coalition, he offered to step down in response to the turmoil. His resignation was first rejected but eventually accepted by the president after it became clear that the coalition was no longer cooperating.

"The majority of national unity that has sustained this government from its creation doesn't exist any more," Draghi wrote in a statement before submitting his resignation on Thursday.

Last summer, the European Union gave Italy billions in aid for pandemic recovery under the condition that the country would prioritize growing its economy and managing its debt.

As the former European Central Bank chief, Draghi was entrusted to handle the relief funds and put Italy's finances in order for the country and the rest of Europe's sake.

That particularly puts the European Central Bank in a difficult situation, Way said. As inflation climbs across Europe, the bank will need to raise interest rates quickly, but doing so will also hike up Italy's debt and risk the sustainability of Italy's finances.

As the third largest economy in the eurozone, both options are likely to have ripple effects in Europe and the United States.

"Potentially destabilizing the Italian economy and the market for its sovereign debt has major implications for the European Union and for the survivability of the euro," Way said.

Now, with Draghi's departure, there's growing concern of whether the next elected government will be fiscally responsible and stay committed to the economic reforms laid out by the EU.

Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Europe has been able to marshal a strong united front against Russia leader Vladimir Putin. But that might change depending on the results of Italy's upcoming elections, said Lucia Rubinelli, an assistant professor in political science at Yale University who has studied Italian politics.

"Draghi was definitely a leading force in Europe against Russia," Rubinelli said. "The problem with Draghi gone is that Italy and many Italian parties have for a very long time been dealing with Russia on better, friendlier terms."

Among the top coalition contenders are the League and Forza Italia, both of whom reportedly have close ties with Putin. If they were elected into the next government, Rubinelli suggests that the EU's strategies including sanctions imposed on Russia and military aid packages to Ukraine may become more complicated.

Italy will likely continue to cooperate in the EU's plans against Russia, Rubinelli adds. But the larger question is what Italy's next elected government may want from the EU in return, which could be issues like having specific sanctions lifted or freedom to enact tighter immigration policies.

Follow this link:
Italian PM Mario Draghi's resignation will have ripple effects in Europe - NPR

1. Introduction

As the transition to a digital society is accelerating in recent years, especially after the coronavirus outbreak, the expectations of the European Citizens for a safer digital environment are growing. There is then an urgent need to combat cybercrime. In two different articles we will address, in particular, the surging phenomenon of the ransomware attacks and how this issue is being tackled within the European Union. In this contribution we will introduce the relevant phenomenon (Chapter 2). In addition, it will be assessed what are the legislative and policy frameworks in place in the European Union for facing this issue (Chapter 3).

2. The ransomware attacks

Ransomware can be described as a type of malware (like viruses, trojans, etc.) that infect the computer systems of users and manipulates the infected system in a way, that the victim cannot (partially or fully) use it and the data stored on it. The victim usually shortly after receives a blackmail note by pop-up, pressing the victim to pay a ransom (hence the name) to regain full access to system and files 1.

The criminality resorts to different types of tactics to achieve their finalities. Ransomware attacks have the primary goal of making monetary gains by way of unlawful means. Ransomware typically encrypts target files and displays notifications, requesting payment before the data can be unlocked. Ransomware demands are usually in the form of virtual currency, such as bitcoin. This because these types of payments are difficult to be tracked2.

Ransomware attacks have certainly a global impact.

A report issued on 2021 has revealed that the frequency and the complexity of ransomware attacks increased (by more than 150% in 2020 such that ransomware can now be defined as one of the greatest threats that organizations face today regardless of the sector to which they belong 3.

The above findings speak volumes on how this issue is serious and of concern for all the world. Consequently, it does not come as a surprise that it has been clearly recognized nowadays that ransomware is a prime item in agendas for meetings on strategy among global leaders 4.

In the fight against ransomware, several challenges need to be addressed. One of the main issues results in the lack of coordination and collaboration between the agencies and the authorities all over the world. There is indeed a lack of legislation in many countries that clearly criminalises ransomware attacks5.

This problem holds true also for the European Union given that: (i) it is made of different Member States which, in some cases, have different internal law frameworks when it comes to cybersecurity and modalities to tackle the ransomware problem; (ii) the issue must be addressed also with reference to the States which are external to the European Union (in which the ransomware phenomenon flourishes).

3. How the European Union is dealing with the issue

Considering all the above, in the following chapter we will look at how the European Union is trying to face the ransomware attacks.

3.1. The European Union legislative interventions

The first step towards the creation and development of an EU cybersecurity ecosystem was the adoption of a cybersecurity strategy in 20136. This strategy identified the achievement of cyber-resilience and the development of industrial and technological resources for cybersecurity as its key objectives. As part of this strategy, the European Commission proposed the EU Network and Information Security directive 2016/1148 (NIS Directive)7.

In particular, the NIS Directive8 sets out that the EU Member States must have certain national cybersecurity capabilities and that there shall be a cooperation in the exchange of information amongst the same EU countries. Moreover, according to the NIS Directive, the EU Member States shall promote a culture of security across sectors very relevant for the EU and which rely on ICTs such as energy, transport, water, banking, financial market infrastructures, healthcare and digital infrastructure 9.

It is interesting to note that the NIS Directive limited to provide for measures by way of which the EU States shall increase their attention when it comes to cyber-attacks. On the other hand, it did not envisage a common and specific framework (for example in terms of sanctions to be applied) for tackling cyber-crimes (such as the ransomware attacks).

That is probably why in June 2017, the EU tried to reinforce its global response to the cyber-attacks (including ransomware) by establishing a Framework for a Joint EU Diplomatic Response to Malicious Cyber Activities (the so called Cyber Diplomacy Toolbox)10.

This framework basically allows the EU and its Member States (by way of an initiative to be taken by the Council) to use all necessary measures ... to prevent, discourage, deter and respond to malicious cyber activities [and thus also to the ransomware attacks] targeting the integrity and security of the EU and its member states .... In particular, the Cyber Diplomacy Toolbox gives the possibility to the Council to impose ... sanctions on persons or entities that are responsible for cyber-attacks or attempted cyber-attacks, who provide financial, technical or material support for such attacks or who are involved in other ways ... 11.

Finally, also in the attempt to reinforce the attack to the malicious cyber activities (such as the ransomware) a revised version of the NIS Directive (to be named NIS2 Directive) has been proposed by the European Commission in 2020. In particular12:

The proposed NIS2 Directive though is now still under discussion13.

3.2. The European Union policy interventions

The European Union has then dealt with the issue of the ransomware attacks also pursuing specific policies of international cooperation on this topic.

In particular, the European Union has soon realized that this problem was global and that it was thus necessary to tackle it also involving the other stakeholders.

That is why the European Union signed for example a joint EU-U.S. statement for working together in the fight against ransomware through law enforcement action, raising public awareness on how to protect networks as well as the risk of paying the criminals responsible, and to encourage those states that turn a blind eye to this crime to arrest and extradite or effectively prosecute criminals on their territory ...14.

Moreover, the EU takes part on a regular basis in international summits (together with important partners such as U.S.A., India and Australia) where it is discussed how to counter this plague on a global scale15.

4. Conclusions

As we have seen above, the current framework set by the European Union to tackle the ransomware attacks is rather complex and worthy to be carefully assessed.

In a subsequent article to be published soon on Lexology, reference will then be made to the main actors in charge of dealing with such phenomenon in Europe and to the strengths and weaknesses of the current EU system of defence against this invasive form of cyber-criminality.

Read more:
The European Union's efforts to tackle the phenomenon of ransomware attacks (Part I) - Lexology