Search

With the progressive digitisation and use, in particular, of the internet of things and artificial intelligence by industries, commerce, financial services, science and education, the public administration, health services as well as individuals, our society and daily life gets more and more dependent on the security of the net: cybersecurity. The new risks are self-made, a threat to almost everybody and new in kind. And they have a global dimension. For the difficulty of attribution of cyber attacks traditional concepts of deterrence and defence are not a solution. Given the new conditions of the ‘digital constellation’ this article aims at exploring instruments and methods of cybersecurity governance in a broad sense, learning from internet governance and taking a constitutional perspective. It is based upon shared responsibility, resilience and citizens’ participation in the making and future application of an inclusive global rule-making system. Multi-stakeholder mechanisms are combined with deliberative processes, standardisation and legislative action. In accordance with the principles of global constitutionalism this new framework of global rule generation would emerge as a common democratic instrument of people to meet common challenges in addition and complementary to action for cybersecurity at the local, regional, national and supranational levels.

As the end of the Brexit process is still not in sight, the consequences of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU—with or without an agreement—are difficult to assess. This volume aims at an interim assessment of Brexit, from basic questions of sovereignty, which Brexiteers seem to be striving to recover, models of differentiated integration and the protection of fundamental rights, to the principle of democracy, which seems to be being challenged in different ways. How has the internal market been affected by Brexit? How have citizens’ social rights as developed by the ECJ been affected? What impact has Brexit had on the control of immigration in the UK? All this is dealt with in part II of this anthology. Its last part is devoted to monetary and financial policies, as well as to the Common Foreign and Security Policy, a policy that is only subject to supranational discipline in part and in which the UK, nevertheless, plays an important role—and may continue to do so in the future. A great deal looks different today than one may have expected prior to the 2016 referendum.

German Abstract: Die Kluft zwischen Regierten und Regierung scheint sich auszudehnen. Trotz Internet und sozialen Netzwerken fuhlen Burgerinnen und Burger abgehangt, von der Politik entfremdet. Europaisierung und Globalisierung tun das Ihrige dazu, dass die Menschen das Gefuhl bekommen, in vielem nicht mehr ihr Schicksal, “sich” selbst bestimmen zu konnen, wie es der demokratischen Idee entspricht. Institutionen, wie vor allem die EU oder auch internationale Organisationen helfen zwar, gemeinsame Probleme auf europaischer oder auch globaler wirksam anzupacken, sie sind aber noch entfernter vom Einzelnen, und die Moglichkeit, auf ihre Entscheidungen Einfluss zu nehmen, schwindet gegen Null. Die Digitalisierung schafft neue Probleme, zT. von globaler Dimension, eroffnet aber auch neue Wege, dem Einzelnen eine Stimme zu geben, die von der Politik auf den diversen Ebenen gehort wird. Ein Instrument konnte das auf ein Register digitaler Identitaten gestutztes digitales Abstimmungsverfahren sein, in dem zu jeder Frage nicht alle Betroffenen, sondern nur eine im Losverfahren ermittelte reprasentative Zahl von Abstimmungsberechtigten zur Wahl aufgerufen wird. Dieses aus dem Angebot der e-ID+ von Procivis und dem “random sample voting” (RSV) von David Chaum zusammengefugte Abstimmungssystem, wie es im Rahmen des DECiDe-Projekts am HIIG entwickelt und getestet wird, ist kostengunstig, effizient und erlaubt vielfache Befragungen, ohne dass die Einzelnen uberfordert wurden. Es muss allerdings hohen Sicherheitsanforderungen genugen und verfassungsrechtlichen Grundsatzen entsprechen, insbesondere dem vom Bundesverfassungsgericht aufgestellten Wahlrechtsgrundsatz der Offentlichkeit der Wahl. Der vorliegende Beitrag stellt die Grundidee des Systems vor und stellt mogliche Losungen zu den verfassungsrechtlichen Fragen zur Diskussion. English Abstract: There seems to be an increasing gap between the governed and the government. In spite of the Internet and social networks citizens feel often lost and alienated from politics. Europeanisation and globalisation apparently add the the feeling of people that it is becoming more and more difficult to determine their destiny, to “self-” determine as the idea of democracy promises. While institutions like the EU, in particular, as well as international organisations are useful to cope with common problems more effectively at the European and global levels, they are even more remote for the individual, and their relative influence on political decisions is vanishing towards zero. Digitisation creates new problems, in part of a global dimension, yet it also offers new ways for giving the individual a voice to be heard by politics at all the diverse levels. One such new instrument could be the digital voting system actually developed and tested within the framework of the DECiDe project of HIIG. It is composed of a register of digital identities of citizens, such as offered as e-ID+ by Procivis and the random sample voting tool (RSV) developed by David Chaum. Instead of calling to the vote the entire relevant population, it allows participation only to a randomly selected representative group. It is cost-efficient and allows for many and diverse polls and referendums without overstraining the people but it must also meet highest security requirements and be in conformity with constitutional law including, in particular, the principle of electoral transparence and control as it was developed by the case law of the German Federal Constitutional Court. The present paper gives an oversight of the basic idea of the system and offers solutions for the constitutional issues to be further discussed.

The ongoing transatlantic dialogue on cybersecurity and privacy yielded a second conference at the New York University Center for Cybersecurity in October 2018. In a natural evolution, the New York conference used the foundation laid in the Berlin Conference to “build common approaches” to achieve better cybersecurity and privacy “in a globalized world.” This edited volume presents the fruits of the second conference. The assembled submissions show that the trans-atlantic dialogue remains critically important to finding and developing solutions to the global issues of cyber-insecurity and the continued erosion of privacy. Much important work remains to be done to identify and put into practice the many small but important steps that civil society, governments, and business can take to make the digital world a safer one. It is hoped that these papers will make a contribution to that end and serve as the basis for a third conference, perhaps in 2020 and perhaps in France.

The price volatility of cryptocurrencies is often cited as a major hindrance to their wide-scale adoption. Consequently, during the last two years, multiple so called stablecoins have surfaced---cryptocurrencies focused on maintaining stable exchange rates. In this paper, we systematically explore and analyze the stablecoin landscape. Based on a survey of 24 specific stablecoin projects, we go beyond individual coins for extracting general concepts and approaches. We combine our findings with learnings from classical monetary policy, resulting in a comprehensive taxonomy of cryptocurrency stabilization. We use our taxonomy to highlight the current state of development from different perspectives and show blank spots. For instance, while over 91% of projects promote 1-to-1 stabilization targets to external assets, monetary policy literature suggests that the smoothing of short term volatility is often a more sustainable alternative. Our taxonomy bridges computer science and economics, fostering the transfer of expertise. For example, we find that 38% of the reviewed projects use a combination of exchange rate targeting and specific stabilization techniques that can render them vulnerable to speculative economic attacks - an avoidable design flaw., Comment: Accepted at IEEE Crypto Valley Conference on Blockchain Technology (CVCBT) 2019

Misconception of the EU is the reason for increasing scepticism – multilevel constitutionalism: conceptualising the EU as a matter of the citizens – critiques and the defence of multilevel constitutionalism – European treaties as a form of a new supranational social contract – embedded autonomy in a system of divided sovereignty – explaining and enhancing democratic legitimacy of the EU – the legitimising principles of additionality, of voluntariness and of open democracy – taking ownership of the EU and taking subsidiarity seriously – backing the European monetary policy by new competences for a common economic and fiscal policies – engaging in European policies as a way out of the crisis.

With the progressive digitisation and use, in particular, of the internet of things and artificial intelligence by industries, commerce, financial services, science and education, the public administration, health services as well as individuals, our society and daily life gets more and more dependent on the security of the net: cybersecurity. The new risks are self-made, present for everybody and new in kind. And they have a global dimension. Facing the difficulty of attribution of cyberattacks, traditional concepts of defence are inapplicable. Given the new conditions of the "digital constellation" this chapter is exploring instruments and methods of cybersecurity governance in a broad sense, learning from internet governance and taking a constitutional perspective. It is based upon shared responsibility, resilience and citizens participation in the making and future application of an inclusive global rule-making system. Multi-stakeholder mechanisms are combined with deliberative processes, standardisation and legislative action. In accordance with the principles of global constitutionalism this new framework of global rule generation would emerge to a common democratic instrument of people to meet a common challenge, in addition and complementary to action for cybersecurity at the local, regional, national and supranational levels.

German Abstract: Die (vermutlich) russische Cyber-Attacke von 2007 gegen Estland, mehr noch aber die von Edward Snowden 2013 enthullte Massenuberwachung und Spionageaktivitaten des NSA hatten eine grose Auswirkung auf die Internetpolitik in Deutschland, in der EU und sogar weltweit. Das erste Ereignis veranlasste die NATO, sich naher mit Fragen des Cyberkrieges zu befassen, mit dem Ergebnis, dass das sog. »Tallinn-Manual« verfasst und veroffentlicht wurde, mit einer Reihe von Definitionen und Regeln zur Anwendung des Volkerrechts, einschlieslich des humanitaren Volkerrechts auf den Cyberkrieg. Eine zweite, auf Angriffe in Friedenszeiten erweiterte Auflage der Handreichung fur das Militar erschien 2017. Als Reaktion auf die Enthullungen von Snowden haben Brasilien und Deutschland einen Prozess zur Verbesserung des weltweiten Menschenrechtsschutzes und insbesondere des Schutzes von Daten und Privatheit durch klarere Bestimmungen des Volkerrechts (»Pillay-Bericht«) initiiert. Und in der »Digitalen Agenda« sowie im Koalitionsvertrag der 2013 neu gebildeten Bundesregierung war ein besonderes Augenmerk nicht nur auf die Digitalisierung der Gesellschaft, sondern auch auf das »Volkerrecht des Netzes« gerichtet. Was aber ist dieses Recht, was sind die im Volkerrecht des Netzes erkennbaren strukturellen Umbruche und wie konnen neue Rechtsentwicklungen auf der globalen Ebene so konzeptualisiert werden, dass auf die Herausforderungen der Digitalisierung eine angemessene Antwort gefunden wird? Der vorliegende Beitrag nutzt das »Tallinn-Manual«, den »Pillay-Bericht« und die Diskussion um ein Volkerrecht des Netzes als Beispiele und Ausgangspunkt fur die Entwicklung einiger Prinzipien einer Verfassung des Internets, auf der Basis von Erfahrungen mit Multi-Stakeholder-Ansatzen, wie sie seit dem Rio-Prozess erprobt und in diversen Foren der Internet-Governance weiterentwickelt wurden. English Abstract: The 2007 (probably) Russian cyber-attack on Estonia, and even more so the NSA mass surveillance and spy activities revealed by Edward Snowden in 2013 had a great impact on internet politics worldwide, in the EU and in Germany. The first event triggered NATO to look closer on cyber war, with the result that the Tallinn Manual was elaborated and published establishing a number of definitions and rules regarding the application of international law, including humanitarian law, on cyber war. A second edition of the Manual, extending it to attacks in peace was published in 2017. As a consequence of the Snowden revelations, Brazil and Germany initiated a process at the UN for establishing the protection of human rights and, in particular, privacy worldwide through clearer provisions under international law (Pillay Report). And in its "Digital Agenda" and in the Coalition Agreement for the new government 2013, with a special focus on the digitisation of the society, particular emphasis was given to the "Volkerrecht des Netzes" (the international law of the internet). What is this law, what are the structural shifts cognisable in the international law of the internet, and how can new legal developments at the global level best be conceptualised to respond to the challenges of digitisation? The present contribution uses the Tallinn Manual, the Pillay Report and the discussion on an international law of the internet as examples and starting points for elaborating some principles of a constitution of the internet, based upon experience from multi-stakeholder settings tested since the Rio Process and developed within the diverse fora of internet governance.

Many political initiatives of the European Union are focussing the development and application of new information and communication technologies (ICT) with regard to the single market and, in particular, to administrative processes at the Union level and among the Member States. While considerable progress has been made insofar, and the notion of e-government plays some role in this context, the discussion on the key constitutional issue of the democratic legitimacy of the European Union seems to remain rather untouched and insulated from the world of the internet. Yet, ICT and, in particular, the internet and e-democracy seem to offer considerable opportunities for enhancing transparency, citizens’ information and participation in the decision-making processes and control of the policies led at Union level. With the theoretical distinction, borrowed from Vivien A. Schmidt, of input-, output- and throughput legitimacy it seems to be possible not only to depict the tools of e-government and e-democracy as bridges of the gap between the citizens and their political institutions in the EU, but also to explore the potentials for further development with a view to overcoming the legitimacy deficits in the “digital Europe”.

Selten findet man in einem Band eine vergleichbare Fulle von Einsichten, Anregungen, Theorieentwurfen und Vorschlagen wie in diesem Beiheft 10 zur Zeitschrift „Die Verwaltung“. Erinnert sei an: „Summum ius, summa iniuria“, die Ringvorlesung der Tubinger Juristenfakultat von 1962/63, sie war vielleicht von ahnlicher Bedeutung. Dies gilt, selbst wenn man auf das vorliegende Buch nicht anwendet, was Andreas Voskuhle, Prasident des Bundesverfassungsgerichts, in seiner Schlussbemerkung zur Diskussion uber den in Karlsruhe neu geborenen Schlusselbegriff der „Integrationsverantwortung“ gesagt haben soll: Nach ihm „seien nicht nur die Passagen eines Urteils wichtig, die tatsachlich in ihm enthalten sind, sondern auch diejenigen, die nicht aufgenommen wurden“ (S. 255, 260). Hier soll es nur um das gehen, was tatsachlich in dem zu besprechenden Band steht.

States and societies are globally interconnected and interdependent. External effects of national policies challenge democratic self-determination in other states. An increasing density of relations among people worldwide through communication, migration, traveling as well as through global challenges like climate change, deregulated financial markets, terrorism and organized crime require common rules. Existing models and practices of governance beyond the state do not seem to present solutions that are both efficient and legitimate. They show, nevertheless, elements that, if combined, could be a basis for a new method for developing legitimate global rules. In addition, diverse concepts of global constitutionalism can provide conceptual tools necessary for constructing a constitutional frame of governance at the global level including emerging legally binding rules. It is the Internet that seems to allow the information and transparency, communication and discourse, participation of and control by (global) citizens necessary for organizing legitimacy. On that basis the present contribution takes experiences from the diverse arenas of governance producing principles, standards and rules, and uses theoretical approaches of global constitutionalism for depicting seven elements or stages of a norm-setting process through which globally binding rules emerge, are validated and revisited in a manner to giving people a voice and so taking people seriously.

Following the dramatic No votes in the French and Dutch referendums on 29 May and 1 June 2005, a need was felt in the European constitutional law profession to react to the shock.EuConst invited members of its Board and members of the European Constitutional Law Network to write a short comment about possible and possibly salutary effects of the events on the ways of European scholarship and teaching. Below are the reactions received. Authors are all members of ECLN and/or the Board of EuConst.The contributions to this issue of EuConst by Jacques Ziller, Sacha Prechal and Herman van Gunsteren carry their comments on the events incorporated.

In federal systems public authority is established by the people and exercised for the people at two levels. The treaties establishing the European Union may be conceptualised as the constitution of a supranational public authority, part of a federal system. And what the European Convention has submitted to the European Council to agree upon is an attempt to give this constitution a more coherent, more complete and more appealing form. The new ‘Constitution for Europe’ will be concluded, formally, by an international treaty. But governments and national parliaments will do this on behalf of the citizens of the Union, and insofar as national Constitutions provide for a referendum, the citizens will directly be involved. This Constitution will, therefore, like national constitutions, draw its legitimacy from the people, citizens of the polity, through their constitutional representatives. Legitimacy obtained is similar to that sought for a regular treaty but specific due to the contents and the explicit constitutional claim of the instrument.

German Abstract: Die Digitalisierung hat unsere Gesellschaften erfasst, sie verandert unsere Beziehung zum Staat und die Rolle des Staates auf der globalen Ebene, so wie die Europaisierung und Globalisierung uns zwingen, tradierte Begriffe und Konzepte der »Verfassung« zu uberdenken. Dieser Beitrag wurde Anfang 2014 verfasst, in der Folge der Snowden-Enthullungen und der Veroffentlichung der Digitalen Agenda in Deutschland und des Koalitionsvertrags der nach den Wahlen von 2013 gebildeten deutschen Regierung. Die Digitalisierung wurde ein Top-Thema in der Politik, seit klar wurde, dass sie strukturelle Umbruche mit sich bringt, die nicht nur Markte und Industrien, sondern auch die Gesellschaft und unser politisches System insgesamt betreffen. Wahrend die digitale Gesellschaft zur globalen Gesellschaft wird, konnen Regelungszustandigkeiten und die Verantwortung fur (digitale) Sicherheit, aber auch der Schutz der Menschenrechte nicht auf den Staat allein begrenzt bleiben. Neue Verfassungsstrukturen, jenseits des Staates, sind notig, um Regelungsprozesse fur den Schutz von Gemeinschaftsgutern global bereitzustellen. Das Internet ist nicht nur Gegenstand eines solchen normativen Rahmens, sondern es verleiht uns auch Instrumente, dank derer die Schaffung legitimer globaler Regelwerke moglich werden konnte. Dieser Beitrag entwickelt einige Ideen, wie eine »Verfassung der Internet-Governance« aussehen konnte – als ein Schritt zur Konzeptualisierung einer Verfassung der Internetgesellschaft im allgemeineren Sinne. English Abstract: Digitisation has reached our societies, it changes our relationship to the state and the role of states globally and – like Europeanisation and Globalisation – it is compelling us to revisit our notion and concepts of "constitution". This essay was written in early 2014, in the wake of the Snowden revelations and of the publication of the German Digital Agenda and the Coalition Agreement of the German government, established after the 2013 elections. Digitisation became a top issue in politics, since it became clear that it triggers structural shifts affecting not only markets and industries, but also the society and our political systems. While the digital society is growing global, regulatory powers and the responsibilities for (cyber)security and the protection of human rights cannot be limited to the state alone. New constitutional structures, beyond the state, are necessary to provide for regulatory processes regarding certain common goods globally. The internet is not only the subject of such a global normative framework, but it also provides tools for making the establishment of legitimate global rules possible. This essay develops some ideas how a "constitution of internet governance" could be designed – as a step towards conceptualising more generally a constitution of the internet-society.

Given some important amendments of the European Treaties and recent case-law of the courts at the European and national levels this article seeks to establish to what extent the fundamental right to an effective remedy and judicial protection of rights and freedoms guaranteed by Union law (Article 47 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights) is given effect. It honours the jurisprudence of the ECJ for the 60 years of its existence, and it pleads for a broad interpretation to be given to Article 263 (4) TFEU as a new opportunity to ensure access to justice for the individual being directly affected by the provisions of a Union regulation. Looking at the national level, note is taken of the achievements, but also of the difficulties of the German Federal Constitutional Court to ensure that German courts refer cases to the ECJ when the rights or freedoms of individuals are at stake. Yet, a comparative study would be needed in order to assess the situation in other Member States in implementing their respective duties under Article 19 (1) TEU.