This article is the result of an international research between law and ethics scholars from Universities in France and Switzerland, who have been closely collaborating with technical experts on the design and use of information and communication technologies in the fields of human health and security. The interdisciplinary approach is a unique feature and guarantees important new insights in the social, ethical and legal implications of these technologies for the individual and society as a whole. Its aim is to shed light on the tension between secrecy and transparency in the digital era. A special focus is put from the perspectives of psychology, medical ethics and European law on the contradiction between individuals' motivations for consented processing of personal data and their fears about unknown disclosure, transferal and sharing of personal data via information and communication technologies (named the "privacy paradox"). Potential benefits and harms for the individual and society resulting from the use of computers, mobile phones, the Internet and social media are being discussed. Furthermore, the authors point out the ethical and legal limitations inherent to the processing of personal data in a democratic society governed by the rule of law. Finally, they seek to demonstrate that the impact of information and communication technology use on the individuals' well-being, the latter being closely correlated with a high level of fundamental rights protection in Europe, is a promising feature of the socalled "e-democracy" as a new way to collectively attribute meaning to large-scale online actions, motivations and ideas.
Over the past few months, the relations between French supreme courts and EU law seem to have entered an era of reassuring transparency and clarity. This contribution will mainly focus on two rulings rendered by the French supreme courts ("Conseil d'Etat" and "Cour de cassation"), each dealing with an aspect of the relations between national and EU law. The Perreux ruling rendered by the Conseil d'Etat put an end to one of the oldest disputes between itself and the European Court of Justice: the obstinate refusal, since 1978, to recognize the direct effect of directives. By its Melki ruling, the Cour de Cassation made a reference for a preliminary ruling to the ECJ regarding, inter alia, the compatibility of the new French "priority preliminary ruling on the issue of constitutionality" (PPRC) mechanism with EU law. The article tries to show how, in the light of a real rule of reason, the national courts and the ECJ managed to specify the terms of a relationship structured around an unyielding necessity: the protection of fundamental rights. This virtuous dialogue is itself structured by procedural systems which contribute to strengthen decisively the coherence of the European legal order.
Resumé Nombre de personnalités, dans les lieux de recherche et d’enseignement, la vie associative et religieuse, façonnent un nouvel espace public entre les deux rives.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.