http://hdl.handle.net/11728/24 Σχολή Νομικής και Κοινωνικών Επιστημών Sun, 22 Mar 2026 14:17:01 GMT 2026-03-22T14:17:01Z http://hdl.handle.net/11728/13271 Improving the EU’s Readiness to Admit Ukraine Without Amending the Lisbon Treaty Dionysiou, Evita In the unprecedented circumstances of the full-scale war in Ukraine, the country’s accession to the European Union (EU) has come to be viewed as a geopolitical imperative. However, despite renewed political commitment to enlargement, the Union remains poorly equipped to admit new members without jeopardising its internal cohesion and functionality. This article examines how the EU can enhance its institutional readiness to integrate Ukraine without amending the Lisbon Treaty. It identifi es four complementary reforms that can strengthen the Union’s decisionmaking and enforcement capacities: (a) broader use of Qualifi ed Majority Voting (QMV); (b) activation of the passerelle clauses as a legal bridge toward fl exibility; (c) strategic use of constructive abstention to preserve unity in the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP); and (d) development of a cooperative enforcement model to improve implementation of EU legislation. By linking these mechanisms to the current debate on enlargement and governance, the article demonstrates that meaningful institutional adjustment is possible within the existing Treaty framework. It argues that such reforms would not only prepare the EU for Ukraine’s accession but also strengthen the Union’s overall legal coherence, external credibility, and rule-of-law resilience. To conclude, this paper advocates that the momentum created by Ukraine’s membership application should be seized upon to build a more responsive, credible, and strategically autonomous Union – one capable of deepening its integration while widening its membership. Wed, 01 Jan 2025 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11728/13271 2025-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/11728/12874 The dark side of anti-money laundering: Mitigating the unintended consequences of FATF standards Pavlidis, Georgios The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is the primary authority for setting standards in the fields of anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism. However, there are legitimate concerns regarding the unintended adverse effects resulting from the expansion of FATF standards. This paper aims to examine the dark side of FATF standards, focusing on the issues of de-risking, financial exclusion, and the unwarranted targeting of Non-Profit Organizations. While the FATF standards themselves are not the sole causes of these phenomena, they can contribute to their persistence and exacerbation. Addressing these effects necessitates a thorough understanding of FATF's risk-based approach, adherence to the principle of proportionality, and a sense of ownership in the design and implementation of FATF standards. Sun, 01 Jan 2023 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11728/12874 2023-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/11728/12873 Transforming Asset Recovery Offices (AROs) to Enhance Their Role in Combating Money Laundering Pavlidis, Georgios Purpose This paper critically examines the recent legislative initiative of the European Union (EU) – the new Directive 2024/1260 on asset recovery and confiscation. It focuses particularly on the provisions that revamp Asset Recovery Offices (AROs) as part of the EU’s anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) strategy. This paper aims to explore why the reform of AROs was considered necessary; highlight the key objectives, rules and principles governing AROs; and discusses the challenges and opportunities that arise as AROs are strengthened. Design/methodology/approach This paper draws on reports, legislation, legal scholarship and other open-source data on the EU legislative initiative to enhance the role and effectiveness of AROs in AML/CFT. Findings The new Directive 2024/1260 on asset recovery and confiscation establishes a comprehensive framework for AROs, aimed at improving their effectiveness and cooperation. If organizational challenges are properly addressed, AROs will greatly strengthen the EU’s capabilities in the field of AML/CFT. Originality/value To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first to explore the new roles and powers of AROs under Directive 2024/1260 on asset recovery and confiscation, providing a critical analysis of how the Directive addresses longstanding inefficiencies in asset recovery. It examines the harmonization of AROs’ powers, enhanced mechanisms for cross-border cooperation and improved access to data resources. The study assesses the challenges and opportunities related to AROs operation, offering insights into the Directive’s transformative potential for combating crime within the EU. Wed, 01 Jan 2025 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11728/12873 2025-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/11728/12872 Empowering sustainable finance with artificial intelligence: a framework for responsible implementation Pavlidis, Georgios The global economy and societies around the world are facing a once-in-a-lifetime situation, as two major developments are underway and becoming collinear. On the one hand, financial markets are rapidly entering the era of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing. Market participants predict that investors’ demand for more diverse instruments, such as green and ESG-linked loans, will increase in the coming years.1 On the other hand, the artificial intelligence (AI) industry is experiencing close to exponential growth, and the impact of this new technology on business and society has already become visible. Indeed, the estimated value of the global AI market was $387.45 billion in 2022, and it is projected to reach $1,394.30 billion in 2029, with a compound annual growth rate of 20.1 per cent in this period.2 The aim of this chapter is to examine how these two processes – the rise of ESG investing (Section II) and the ascendance of AI technological innovation (Section III) – could be aligned and which risks and opportunities would emerge from this alignment. We argue that AI can help markets identify and price climate risks as well as set more ambitious ESG goals, yet there are serious risks in delegating sustainable finance p. 24 decisions to AI. We further argue that developing new principles and rules for AI and ESG investing is necessary but prone to ambiguities and practical obstacles that could undermine norm-setting initiatives (Section IV). We conclude that implementing changes such as the use of AI in non-financial reporting requires a new sense of responsibility and the fine-tuning of the principles of legitimacy, oversight and verification, transparency, and explainability, along with international coordination in the context of AI and ESG investing (Section V). Wed, 01 Jan 2025 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11728/12872 2025-01-01T00:00:00Z