Conference Agenda

Online platforms are indispensable to our daily activities as users. In addition, businesses are increasingly using online platforms in the business model. As online platforms boost innovation and develop the economy, few online platforms act as gatekeepers by controlling a large digital market, likely leading to unfair practices and conditions for business users and end users. These gatekeepers have challenged the traditional enforcement of competition law in the digital markets. To address the behaviour of large online platforms in the internal market, on 24 March 2022, the EU adopted a regulation commonly known as the Digital Market Act.

Likewise, in the EU, the growth of digital platforms and e-commerce platforms has created new challenges for WBc National Competition Authorities in handling cases concerning online platforms. This research focuses on the impact of the Digital Market Act on the Western Balkan countries’ competition law. Moreover, the paper discusses whether Western Balkan countries’ national competition authorities have dealt with online platforms and outlines the main challenges encountered in the digital economy. The paper adopts doctrinal and comparative legal research. Doctrinal research analyses and interprets the Digital Market Act and the Western Balkan countries’ competition laws. Comparative legal research examines whether and to what extent Western Balkan countries’ competition law addresses the behaviour of online platforms.

The paper argues that pursuant to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement harmonisation clause, the Western Balkan countries must transpose the Digital Market Act into their domestic legal system and National Competition Authorities should be empowered to address issues raised by online platforms. As it stands currently, the Western Balkan countries’ national competition authorities lack the necessary human, financial, and technical resources to handle these kinds of cases.

In the beginning of 2024, the Greek Parliament voted the establishment of University Education Legal Entities, special purpose non-profit legal entities with the sole purpose of providing higher education services. Law no. 5094/2024 allows the establishment of University Education Legal Entities as branches of higher education institutions that are based in other EU member states or third countries. The law triggered constitutional debate as to its compliance with the Constitution. In particular, article 16, para. 5 states that “education at university level shall be provided exclusively by institutions which are fully self-governed public legal entities. Moreover, paragraph 8 of the same article adds, “the establishment of higher education institutions by private individuals is prohibited”. On the other hand, article 14, para. 3 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights guarantees the freedom to found educational establishments, in accordance with the national laws governing the exercise of such freedom and right. Furthermore, according to the well-established case law of the CJEU, education falls under the scope of internal market law, the right of establishment (article 49 TFEU) and freedom to provide services (article 56 TFEU). Therefore, the right to establish non-public (private) higher education institutions has been developed through the case law of the Court of Justice as a right provided under EU law. The aim of this presentation is to review the establishment of non-public Universities in Greece from a national and EU law standpoint, which will add to the matter of conflict between national and EU legislation.

The evolution of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice in the last 30 years has been remarkable. From being on the periphery of EU integration at the beginning of the 1990s, Treaty amendments in Maastricht, prolific legislative activity and a strong political commitment by the European Council in Tampere, Hague and Stockholm have helped push migration, policing and criminal justice to the centre stage of EU policymaking

Paradoxically, in the AFSJ comprehensive integration driven by the EU institutions has taken place, embracing new substantive areas, actors and governance methods, despite the fact that the policy area embodies high sovereignty and national identity costs for the Member States. Conventional theories of intergovernmentalism have been unable to explain why and how, under these circumstances, have institutions and actors on the supranational EU level succeeded in pursuing deep political and legal integration.

Given this, this paper seeks to analyse the extent to which the AFSJ has transformed from an essentially intergovernmental policy field to a supranational policy area, since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. The paper argues that the prominent evolution of the AFSJ justifies an endeavour to revisit some of the fundamental debates on the nature of European integration.

Our starting point is that any contribution needs to be positioned within the perennial battleground between the leading theories of intergovernmentalism and supranationalism. The paper juxtaposes the standard supranational paradigm and the theory of ‘new intergovernmentalism’ or this purpose, and analyse the design, developments in law, policy and governance of the AFSJ in light of the general literature of EU integration.

The paper first locates what this contribution wishes to add to the existing literature in the field (II). Subsequently, it ventures into re-examining the definition of supranationalism trying to reconceptualise the theory to better fit the recent developments of EU law and policy by looking the relationship between law and politics in European integration (III). To showcase this argument the remaining part of the paper will offer a detailed examination of the evolution of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice as a case study for our general approach (IV).

Digital education is a transformative tool for expanding access to learning in conflict zones, where traditional educational systems are disrupted by violence, displacement, and infrastructure collapse. Drawing from my expertise as a legal tech specialist and human rights educator with over a decade of experience teaching in contexts ranging from the Global South to the Global North, this paper explores the implications of digital education in such contexts for European Union (EU) policy on online universities. Having engaged extensively with online teaching projects in conflict zones, I bring practical insights into the opportunities and challenges associated with delivering education in these fragile settings.

Digital education platforms serve as critical lifelines for displaced individuals, refugees, and conflict-affected populations, enabling learners to continue their studies and acquire skills essential for rebuilding their lives. For instance, initiatives like the Kiron Open Higher Education program and the use of mobile-based learning in refugee camps have demonstrated the potential of technology to reach marginalized learners. My own involvement in similar projects underscores the importance of tailoring content to the socio-economic and cultural realities of learners, addressing gender disparities, and incorporating multilingual curricula.

Despite its promise, digital education in conflict zones faces significant barriers, including unreliable internet connectivity, limited power supply, digital literacy gaps, and data security concerns. EU online universities are uniquely positioned to address these challenges through innovative approaches such as offline education resources (e.g., low-bandwidth platforms like Kolibri), community-driven digital literacy programs, and public-private partnerships to expand access to affordable technology. Programs like the EU’s Erasmus+ Virtual Exchange illustrate how virtual mobility can foster intercultural dialogue and inclusion, even under difficult circumstances.

This paper further examines the critical role of legal and institutional frameworks in ensuring cross-border recognition of qualifications earned through online education, drawing on examples like the Council of Europe’s European Qualifications Passport for Refugees. It concludes with actionable policy recommendations for enhancing the EU’s role in digital education, including investments in robust digital infrastructure, adaptive pedagogies, and ethical frameworks aligned with humanitarian principles. By leveraging the EU’s resources and expertise, its online universities can emerge as global leaders in promoting education continuity, resilience, and equity in some of the world’s most vulnerable regions.