Legal Impediments in the EU to New Technologies in the Example of E-Residency

Open access

Abstract

Estonia has created of itself the image of an e-state that is being supported with novel ICT-solutions, the perhaps most renowned of which is e-residency. However, created as a governmental start-up in the national best interest, e-residency could be of marginal relevance in light of global digital identity management. Purely national digital identity or an e-residency grants its holder several rights unknown to, or at least unapplied in a majority of the EU Member States and in the world more generally. But currently it lies on a vacillating legal pedestal which has resulted in copious administrative issues and proposed legal amendments already during its first year of implementation. Concerns, such as the administrative capacity of Estonia to handle potentially 10 million customers of national e-services, arise due to contingent legal footing. On this basis, efficiency of e-residency is critically analysed from the perspective of an autoschediastic regulatory framework presuming high-level administrative competence yet leaving the scope and limits of the functions of the public authorities legally unfurnished and isolated from the EU legal space.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Al-Khouri Ali Mohamed. “Digital identity: Transforming GCC economies.” Innovation: Management Policy & Practice 16 (2) (2014): 184–194.

  • 2. De Andrade Norberto Norberto Nuno Gomes. “Electronic Identity for Europe: Moving from Problems to Solutions.” Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology 8 (2) (2013): 104–109.

  • 3. De Hert Paul. “Identity management of e-ID privacy and security in Europe. A human rights view.” Information Security Technical Report (13) (2008): 71–75.

  • 4. Drechsler Wolgang and Vasilis Kostakis. “Should Law Keep Pace with Technology? Law as Katechon.” Bulletin of Science Technology & Society 34(5-6) (2014): 128–132.

  • 5. Graux Hans. “Moving towards a comprehensive legal framework for electronic identification as a trust service in the European Union.” Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology 8 (2) (2013): 110–117.

  • 6. Hansen Marit Peter Berlich Jan Camenisch Sebastian Claus Andreas Pfitzmann and Michael Waidner. “Privacy-Enhancing Identity Management.” Information Security Technical Report 9 (1) (2004): 35–44.

  • 7. Hoikkanen Anssi Margherita Bacigalupo Ramón Compañó Wainer Lusoli and Ioannis Maghiros. “New Challenges and Possible Policy Options for the Regulation of Electronic Identity.” Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology 5 (1) (2010): 1–10.

  • 8. Karo Erkki and Rainer Kattel. “Public Management Policy Capacity Innovation and Development.” Brazilian Journal of Political Economy 34(1) (2014): 80–102.

  • 9. Madise Ülle and Priit Vinkel. “Internet Voting in Estonia: From Constitutional Debate to Evaluation of Experience Over Six Elections. Regulating eTechnologies in the European Union”: 53–72. In: Tanel Kerikmäe ed. Normative Realties and Trends. Springer 2014.

  • 10. Mahler Tobias. “Governance Models for Interoperable Electronic Identities.” Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology 8 (2) (2013): 148–159.

  • 11. Martens Taavi. “Electronic identity management in Estonia between market and state governance.” Identity in the Information Society 3 (1) (2010): 213–233.

  • 12. Nyman-Metcalf Katrin. “E-Governance in Law and by Law. The Legal Framework of e-governance”: 33–51. In: Tanel Kerikmäe ed. Regulating eTechnologies in the European Union: Normative Realities and Trends. Springer 2014.

  • 13. Pappel Ingrid and Ingmar Pappel. “Implementation of Service-based E-government and Establishment of State IT Components Interoperability at Local Authorities.” 3rd International Conference on Advanced Computer Control (ICACC) (2011) // https://www.infona.pl/resource/bwmeta1.element.ieee-art-000006016434.

  • 14. Rundle Mary et al. “At a Crossroads: ‘Personhood’ and Digital Identity in the Information Society.” STI Working Paper 2007/7 (2008) // http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/31/6/40204773.doc.

  • 15. Särav Sandra and Tanel Kerikmäe. “E-Residency – a Cyberdream Embodied in a Digital Identity Card?”: 61–86. In: Tanel Kerikmäe and Addi Rull eds. The Future of Law and eTechnologies. Springer-Verlag Heidelberg 2016.

  • 16. Saxby Steve. “Electronic identity: The global challenge.” Presented at the 8th International Conference on Legal Security and Privacy issues in IT Law (LSPI) November 11-15 2013 Tilleke & Gibbins International Ltd. Bangkok Thailand. Computer Law & Security Review 30 (2) (2014): 112–125.

  • 17. Strauss Stefan and Georg Aichholzer. “National Electronic Identity Management: The Challenge of a citizen-centric Approach beyond Technical Design.” International Journal on Advances in Intelligent Systems 1-2 (3) (2010): 12–23.

  • 18. Zhang Kunbei. “Incomplete Data Protection Law.” German Law Journal 15 (6) 2014): 1071–1104.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.42

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.138
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.281

Target audience: researchers and scholars 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.
Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 509 361 10
PDF Downloads 256 169 3