<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The term “protection of legitimate expectations” in administrative law traditionally draws our attention to vertical relationships between the State and an individual. In my text I propose a non-traditional approach to the issue of protection of legitimate expectations in administrative law. Instead of analysing the problem from the perspective of the relationship between the administrative body and the individual, I have attempted to tackle the problem from the perspective of entities involved in peer relationships.The subject of my analysis is the principle of good faith as the axiological foundation for the protection of legitimate expectations in administrative law. Next the article addresses the specific legal institutions that express the protection of legitimate expectations in horizontal perspective: prohibition to make assertions contradictory to prior position (estoppel), institutions that express the protection of legitimate expectations in administrative contracts, as well as the principle of good faith in relationship between administrative bodies. The principle of good faith is a universal legal construct that forms the foundation of the legal system. Thus it is applicable in the sphere of administrative law, especially in the case of the relationship between equal-level entities.</abstract>

The Protection of Legitimate Expectations in Administrative Law: A Horizontal Perspective

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The occupation of Crimea and war in Eastern Ukraine brought minority issues to the top of the Baltic security agenda. Although experts estimate that a separatist scenario for Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia is not probable, the issue of national minorities has already been included into the security concept as a potential source of danger to stability and national identity. While there is need to analyze political risks in the Baltics, the concept of securitization will be applied to the topic of national minorities. This paper addresses the problem of national minorities’ political integration and loyalty to the state. For the empirical analysis, the paper will use secondary data of surveys conducted in 2014-2017, exposing opinions and beliefs of minorities in the Baltic States referring to their domestic and foreign policies, NATO, Ukrainian crisis and relations with Russia. As a result, the concluding suggestion is made that more attention should be paid to political cohesion and minority policy management: 1) to optimize the minority development; 2) to predict potential risks in the region, and 3) to prevent further threats from Russia.</abstract>

The Securitization of National Minorities in the Baltic States

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">In 2013 and 2015, the ECtHR in the famous case of <italic>Delfi AS v. Estonia</italic> recognised the possibility for a website operator to be liable for the delayed removal of illegal comments of internet users. In this case the ECtHR formulated criteria for a website operator’s liability for damage caused to a third party by its visitor comments. The judgment of 2016 in the case of <italic>MTE &amp; Index</italic> v. <italic>Hungary</italic> the ECtHR modified the criteria for a website operator’s liability, interpreting it to the benefit of web managers. This article seeks to reveal the criteria for the liability of a website operator and to draw some general guidance that can be applied in similar cases.</abstract>

Website Operators’ Liability for Offensive Comments: A Comparative Analysis of <italic>Delfi as v. Estonia</italic> and <italic>MTE &amp; Index v. Hungary</italic>

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The aim of this interdisciplinary paper is to study the social reality surrounding the data processing practices employers and employees engage in on social networking sites (SNS). Considering the lack of empirical studies, as well as the considerable uncertainty in the way personal data protection is implemented across the European Union (EU), the paper offers insights on the topic. Qualitative text analysis of semi-structured interviews with employers from the service sector (N=10) and the field of media and communication (N=15), as well as employers from organisations which had experienced various problems due to things their employees had posted on social media (N=14), and employees from the financial sector (N=15) were carried out to explore whether the data protection principles, which can be viewed as the most important guidelines for employers in the EU, are actually followed in their everyday SNS data processing practices. Even though the data protection principles emphasise the need for fair, purposeful, transparent, minimal and accurate processing of personal data, our interviews with employers and employees reveal that the actual SNS processing practices rarely live up to the standards. Our findings indicate that there is a growing mismatch between the social reality and legal requirements regarding data subjects.</abstract>

Employers as Nightmare Readers: An Analysis of Ethical and Legal Concerns Regarding Employer-Employee Practices on SNS

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">In the past few years the use of unmanned aerial vehicles in Lithuania has significantly increased. However, enjoying the advantages of this technology, which improves society’s socio-economical safety (public safety in a broad sense), raises some privacy concerns. This article analyses European Union and national legal regulations regarding the use of unmanned aerial vehicles as well as legal tools for defence of the right to privacy or prevention from its breaches in the Republic of Lithuania. Unmanned aerial vehicles have become popular only recently; thus, legislation regarding their use has not yet become a common topic among lawyers. Furthermore, case law of the Republic of Lithuania is silent about it. Thus, the authors model a situation of breach of privacy using an unmanned aerial vehicle and analyse possible defence mechanisms.</abstract>

Regulation of Unmanned Aerial Systems and Related Privacy Issues in Lithuania

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The ‘access to justice’ within the meaning of the Treaty of Lisbon and the pertinent CJEU jurisprudence is primarily seen as access to the EU judicial system, i.e. to the EU Member States’ national courts applying the EU Law or/and the CJEU. The concept of ‘access to justice’ is therefore developing such premises of the <italic>Van Gend en Loos</italic> judgment as direct effect, vigilance of the EU individual, and the symbiotic relationship between the CJEU and national courts via the preliminary reference procedure. This work aims to explore the development of two basic ideas of <italic>Van Gend en Loos</italic>, i.e. granting directly enforceable EU rights to individuals and authorizing national courts to protect those rights, in light of the ‘access to justice’ concept within the meaning of the Lisbon Treaty – considering their importance for the realization of EU individuals’ substantive rights and uncertainty surrounding this issue. The paper develops a critique of the theory of justice in EU Law, analyzing if and how the <italic>Van Gend en Loos</italic> premises influenced the role of individuals making an attempt to claim their EU rights and the role of the EU courts responsible for the enforcement of ‘access to justice’ in the European Union. The claim of this paper is that the new concept of ‘access to justice’ brought by the Lisbon Treaty may be seen as the further development of the <italic>Van Gend</italic> ‘federalizing effect’ for greater integration through law and an enhanced protection of the individual within the EU multilevel system of Human Rights protection.</abstract>

‘Access to Justice’ and the Development of the <italic>Van Gend En Loos</italic> Doctrine: The Role of Courts and of the Individual in EU Law

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The article examines how regional integration courts can act as judicial brakes, at a time when “constitutional coups” – leaders staying in power past constitutional time limits or other forms of actions against the spirit if not always the letter of the constitution – are alarmingly common. The article discusses how regional courts can be used to modify or protect national rule of law and the constitutional order from the outside (i.e. from the regional integration aspect) and the extent to which this can be valid particularly to promote a uniform interpretation and application of human rights. Although this trend is visible in Europe, it is more striking, because less expected, on other continents, in particular Africa and the Americas, where the developments take place in less than perfect democratic environments. The article contains evidence from cases dealt with in the various regional courts, supporting that a system of political and judicial oversight, especially in regions with weak or fragile democratic systems, can be a useful addition to national judicial or other mechanisms of protection of rule of law and control of the executive. Action by regional courts helps defeat perceptions of majoritarian politics, which in many countries allow for the winner to take all. Under a system of regional oversight, states become aware of the limits they themselves have set and citizens become aware of their possibilities to challenge political power.</abstract>

Regional Courts as Judicial Brakes?

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Cooperation and networking among a variety of organisations for the purpose of research, projects, and other activities ranges from <italic>ad hoc</italic> to long term organisational relationships, formalised or based on informal cooperation. Although informality is frequently much valued and drives organisations to partner on substance rather than bureaucracy, formalisation of networks and cooperation might be indispensible for effective partnerships and activities, as well as representation of mutual interests beyond the national level. How shall such networks be formalised at European and/or national levels so that they are flexible enough, involve minimum bureaucracy, and engage the maximum scope of possible activities? This article focuses on the analysis of possible legal structures facilitating the work of a group of entities and individuals engaged in cross-border activities. This study examines the potential of national legal opportunities in five countries: Belgium, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland and the Netherlands, and the proven legal form of EEIG in reducing the barriers for cooperation, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of these legal forms for a formalized network and the purposes it serves.</abstract>

Corporate Forms Facilitating Non-Profit Networking: Formalizing the Informal

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The aim of the paper is twofold - to cover the latest nuclear energy politics events and reveal the dynamics in public perception of nuclear energy by explaining the distribution of attitudes among two notable social groups in Lithuania. The paper is based on two empirical research studies (public polls) carried out in 2013 and 2017. The paper consists of four parts. starts with brief review of main happenings in recent nuclear politics and general tendencies public perception of nuclear energy. Then, it presents cluster analysis of both 2013 and 2017 polls, in which respondents were divided into two groups based on income, education and occupation. Lastly, the paper presents findings and discusses the dynamics of public perception. Comparing the 2017 data with the results of 2013, three main tendencies can be distinguished. First, society became better informed and more critical. Second, the cluster analysis divided respondents in two almost identical groups as in 2013 (with minor peculiarities). Third, the general tendency presupposes the breaking of the irrelevance of nuclear energy as an important factor for energy security in public perception.</abstract>

Switching Political Nuclear Energy Preferences, Changing Public Attitude

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 16 (2024): Issue 2 (February 2024)

Volume 16 (2023): Issue 1 (September 2023)

Volume 15 (2022): Issue 2 (December 2022)

Volume 15 (2022): Issue 1 (October 2022)

Volume 14 (2021): Issue 2 (December 2021)

Volume 14 (2021): Issue 1 (June 2021)

Volume 13 (2020): Issue 2 (December 2020)

Volume 13 (2020): Issue 1 (June 2020)

Volume 12 (2019): Issue 2 (December 2019)

Volume 12 (2019): Issue 1 (June 2019)

Volume 11 (2018): Issue 2 (December 2018)

Volume 11 (2018): Issue 1 (June 2018)

Volume 10 (2017): Issue 2 (December 2017)

Volume 10 (2017): Issue 1 (June 2017)

Volume 9 (2016): Issue 2 (December 2016)

Volume 9 (2016): Issue 1 (June 2016)

Volume 8 (2015): Issue 2 (December 2015)

Volume 8 (2015): Issue 1 (June 2015)

Volume 7 (2014): Issue 2 (December 2014)

Volume 7 (2014): Issue 1 (June 2014)

Volume 6 (2013): Issue 2 (December 2013)

Volume 6 (2013): Issue 1 (June 2013)

Volume 5 (2012): Issue 2 (December 2012)

Volume 5 (2012): Issue 1 (June 2012)

Volume 4 (2011): Issue 2 (December 2011)

Volume 4 (2011): Issue 1 (June 2011)

Volume 3 (2010): Issue 2 (December 2010) The Problem of the State of Exception

Volume 3 (2010): Issue 1 (June 2010)

Volume 2 (2009): Issue 2 (December 2009)

Volume 2 (2009): Issue 1 (June 2009)

Volume 1 (2008): Issue 1 (December 2008)

Baltic Journal of Law & Politics

Baltic Journal of Law &amp; Politics (BJLP) is a scholarly journal, published bi-annually in electronic form as a joint publication of the Faculty of Political Science and Diplomacy and the Faculty of Law of Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania). BJLP provides a platform for the publication of scientific research in the fields of law and politics, with a particular emphasis on interdisciplinary research that cuts across these traditional categories. Topics may include, but are not limited to the Baltic Region; research into issues of comparative or general theoretical significance is also encouraged. BJLP is peer-reviewed and published in English.  Why subscribe and read  The journal’s contributions present quality research on topics of critical concern both within and without the academy. The journal provides a platform for the publication of innovative research in the fields of law and politics, with an acute interest in the cross-pollinations of disciplines, comparative approaches to regional issues, and active dialogue on pressing contemporary issues of theoretical and practical import.  Why submit  The journal is committed to the quality of every article from the initial stage of inquiry to the date of publication. The journal provides fast, fair and constructive peer review by specialists in their areas from all over the world. Authors receive editorial assistance in adjusting their manuscripts to the standards of the journal as needed. Submissions from all corners of the fields of law and politics are encouraged, especially research that locates itself at their intersections.  Peer review  BJLP is a refereed journal. Submissions are subject to academic peer-review. Every submitted manuscript receives at least two professional reviews, at least one of which is a double-blind review. The peer-review process typically takes 1-2 months after the paper is accepted to peer-review process after the initial review in the Senior Editorial Board. There are no charges for the review process. For more information please visit Instructions For Authors. Rejection Rate   70%   Archiving  Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy  The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process. 

Baltic Journal of Law & Politics

Volume 10 (2017): Issue 2 (December 2017)

The Protection of Legitimate Expectations in Administrative Law: A Horizontal Perspective

The Securitization of National Minorities in the Baltic States

Website Operators’ Liability for Offensive Comments: A Comparative Analysis of Delfi as v. Estonia and MTE & Index v. Hungary

Employers as Nightmare Readers: An Analysis of Ethical and Legal Concerns Regarding Employer-Employee Practices on SNS

Regulation of Unmanned Aerial Systems and Related Privacy Issues in Lithuania

‘Access to Justice’ and the Development of the Van Gend En Loos Doctrine: The Role of Courts and of the Individual in EU Law

Regional Courts as Judicial Brakes?

Corporate Forms Facilitating Non-Profit Networking: Formalizing the Informal

Switching Political Nuclear Energy Preferences, Changing Public Attitude

Search

All Volumes and Issues in this Journal