Law stories, blogs and videos

Law increasingly addresses complex scientific and technological developments, and Science and Technology Studies (STS) is gradually making its way into legal scholarship. The strength of STS lies in its capacity to debunk abstract regulatory constructions and force law to confront questions of (in)equality and (in)justice. At its core, STS approaches share a commitment to understanding science and technology not merely as technoscientific phenomena but as socially embedded, interrelated, and constructed.

Not every effort triggers a successful outcome. Academic efforts are no exception, and endeavours may fail because of different reasons and at different stages. Failure should be considered a learning experience both for those who attempted to succeed and for those who might attempt in the future. Academic efforts should not always be considered success stories, yet they should always be considered tools for change and for the advancement of legal science.

This blog was originally published on the European Law Blog on 13 March 2025.

On 11 February 2025, the Commission announced the withdrawal of the 2017 Proposal to reform the Comitology Regulation. The reasons for the withdrawal are rather succinct: ‘[n]o foreseeable agreement – the Proposal is blocked and further progress is unlikely’. Branded by the Commission as a ‘new push for European democracy’, the proposal had arguably much more to do with the Commission’s desire to shift the political blame for controversial decisions it would adopt, rather than with a genuine interest in enhancing legitimacy of comitology-based decision-making. Although fundamental design flaws affecting EU executive rulemaking post-Lisbon warrant change, the Commission’s attempt by means of a half-hearted proposal was insufficient to address at least two fundamental problems of constitutional significance. In this blogpost, we argue that the rationale of the EU’s institutional design and the normative centrality of the principle of democracy should serve as the basis for a reform of comitology, reinvolving the EU legislature in politically sensitive cases and boosting participation and transparency through new procedural rules.

Our recent study (with Prof. Wouter Verheyen University of Antwerp) explores the legal uncertainties associated with the rise of online logistics platforms, which optimise the flow of goods through digital procurement mechanisms but lack a clear regulatory framework akin to international transport conventions. By investigating the legal classification of these platforms and examining their intermediary role and liability across different legal systems, the study offers new insights into contract creation in a digitalised logistics context.

To uphold the right to freedom of expression and information, it is essential that ‘public watchdogs’, including journalists, academics, bloggers, human rights activists, and NGOs can expose and highlight social issues, such as corruption and violations of fundamental rights. However, there has been an increase in lawsuits aimed at silencing these persons, known as strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), which are usually initiated by wealthy or influential individuals or companies.