Hybrid Event

Event program

Thursday, 5/28/2026 9:00 AM - 3:30 PM, Nava 1, Hotel Admiral, Opatija 8:30 - 9:00    Coffee and registration  9:00    Opening  9:00 - 10:00    1st panel  Invited Lecture  • G. Vojković (University North, Koprivnica, Croatia) Process Responsibility and Accountability in Digital Public Administration: ISO 37301 as a Compliance Framework for Mandatory Digital Office Operations  Mandatory digital office operations in public administration in the Republic of Croatia establish formalized electronic workflows for document handling, record-keeping, and procedural management. While such informatization ensures regulatory compliance with national administrative requirements, it does not in itself resolve key issues of responsibility, accountability, and legal risk allocation within digital administrative processes. This paper analyses the role of ISO 37301 as a compliance governance framework capable of strengthening responsibility for processes and work within legally mandated digital office systems in Croatia. Using a normative and analytical approach, the paper examines how ISO 37301 complements mandatory informatization by introducing structured responsibility assignment, control mechanisms, and evidence-based accountability without altering the legal obligations defined by Croatian regulations on digital office operations. The analysis demonstrates that ISO 37301 provides a methodological framework for clarifying process ownership, defining responsibilities across organizational levels, and establishing audit-ready accountability in digital administrative environments. In the Croatian context, digital office systems may thus evolve from formal compliance tools into mechanisms for managing legal risk and ensuring responsible decision-making, positioning compliance management as a key element of ICT-law-oriented digital governance in public administration. Presentations and papers  1. N. Gumzej (University of Zagreb Faculty of Law, Zagreb, Croatia), M. Vitaljić (Ministry of Justice, Public Administration and Digital Transformation, Zagreb, Croatia) Software-Mediated Case Allocation and Lawful Bench Formation in Rowicz (C-159/25)  Pending preliminary reference in Rowicz (C-159/25), read with the Advocate General’s Opinion of 19 March 2026, concerns the withdrawal of cases from the judge originally assigned to them and their reallocation via a computerised random allocation system. The question raised is whether the resulting court composition can still be regarded as independent, impartial and previously established by law, and whether its lawfulness can be effectively reviewed. This paper examines what the reference and the Opinion reveal about the legal conditions under which software-mediated allocation may participate in the lawful formation of the bench. Analysis proceeds from a functional premise: where a digital system materially contributes to determining the formation of the court, legal scrutiny follows from the role performed by that system rather than from its technological nomenclature. The paper situates allocation and reallocation within the case law on the guarantee of a tribunal previously established by law, before analysing the Opinion on withdrawal, reallocation and remedies. Its central claim is that software-mediated allocation must remain governed by sufficiently precise rules, supported by reviewable records and open to effective judicial scrutiny. The AI Act is considered only as interpretive indicator. Classification under that Act, high risk status and review under the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU and Article 47 of the Charter remain distinct legal questions. Digital case allocation complies with EU law only where the path from legal rule to assigned judge remains lawful, intelligible and reviewable. 2. R. Polcak (Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic) ISP Liability Landscape after Russmedia  The ISP liability is a relatively delicate and steadily developing regulatory regime that stands at the very core of European IT law. The recent Russmedia case (C-492/23 - Russmedia Digital a Inform Media Press) represents in that sense another significant landmark that changes the course of interpretation of review duties of platform operators set originally namely by the Google France case (C-238/08 - Google France). The paper will discuss not only particular but also possibly broader impact of the judgment to review duties of platform operators regarding various forms of paid illegal advertisement. 10:00 - 11:15    2nd panel  1. A. Erbežnik (New University, European Faculty of Law, Ljubljana, Slovenia), M. Bonačić (University of Zagreb, Faculty of Law, Zagreb, Croatia), L. Bhargava (Berkeley Law, University of California, Berkeley, United States) Basic Blueprint for a Croatian-Slovenian AI Tool for EU Mutual Recognition Instruments in Criminal Law  Mutual recognition in EU criminal law operates on normative fiction – the presumed equivalence of legal systems that are procedurally divergent in practice. This study outlines a basic blueprint for a possible rulebased, retrieval-augmented AI tool designed to support Croatian-Slovenian judicial cooperation in the context of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) and the European Investigation Order (EIO). It maps the national standards (e.g., procedural rights, prison conditions) of both jurisdictions against EU and ECHR requirements and proposes a safeguard architecture that generates outputs to support judicial decision-making. The paper describes an automated workflow that ingests an EAW/EIO standard form, checks it, performs offence mapping, continuously monitors case-law sources, and produces a report tailored to the facts of the case. 2. S. Krajnc (Institute of Criminology at the Faculty of Law, Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia) Personal Data in AI Regulatory Sandboxes  By making at least one national sandbox mandatory in every EU member state by 2 August 2026, the AI Act turns what was previously a scattered regulatory technique into a structured component of EU AI governance. Because AI development is intrinsically data-driven, most sandbox projects will involve the processing of personal data, which must comply with GDPR principles such as lawfulness, purpose limitation, minimisation, storage limitation, transparency, and accountability. Article 59 of the AI Act introduces a tailored framework for further processing of lawfully collected personal data in AI sandboxes, but only for a narrowly defined set of “substantial public interest” domains and under strict conditions. Privacy-related risks, such as purpose creep and re-identification, tensions around automated decision-making and meaningful transparency in opaque systems, call for privacy-oriented sandbox design and coordinated participation of regulatory authorities. But without incentives for participating AI developers, even the most elaborated sandbox designs risk failure – liability exemptions for potential personal data breaches are therefore a key issue of sandbox setup. The AI Act encourages administrators to strike a credible innovation vs. rights balance, emphasizing the cooperation and willingness to learn by administrators, participants and regulatory authorities, while implementing effective safeguards against misuse and “risk-washing”. 3. M. Gusev, A. Madevska-Bogdanova, M. Taneska, Z. Karapancheva, D. Mileski (University Sts Cyril and Methodius, Skopje, Macedonia), M. Micevska (Innovation Dooel, Skopje, Macedonia) Regulatory Requirements of Legal AI Agents  The integration of artificial intelligence into the legal industry changes traditional practices, boosts efficiency, and expands access to legal services, often surpassing current legal standards meant to regulate them. These advanced technologies not only impact general data protection laws and specific AI regulations but also pose challenges related to interpretability, transparency, and explainability, especially when producing incorrect results in a highly regulated legal environment. This overview of the regulatory requirements for legal AI agents explores AI trustworthiness, particularly because incorrect outputs from AI agents are a significant concern due to the technology's tendency to produce the most probable answer, even when it is wrong. Cybersecurity is another important issue when using online AI tools, as they can expose sensitive data or disrupt workflow by malicious actors. Ultimately, we argue that the benefits of this technology outweigh the legal obstacles and limitations, and we offer guidance on addressing these challenges and ensuring regulatory compliance. 4. M. Milenković, P. Vukuša (University of Zagreb Faculty of Transport and Traffic Sciences, Zagreb, Croatia) Legal Aspects of Biometric and Artificial Intelligence Deployment: A Comparative Analysis of EU and China  This paper analyses the legal and regulatory frameworks governing the deployment of biometric technologies and artificial intelligence (AI) in European Union law and the People’s Republic of China. Using a comparative doctrinal approach, it examines how different regulatory models affect the lawful adoption of AI systems, particularly in relation to data protection and fundamental rights. China’s state-driven regulatory framework combines industrial policy with evolving data governance rules, whereas Croatia operates within the European Union’s supranational legal order, including data protection law and the newly adopted Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act). While the AI Act establishes harmonised requirements for high-risk AI systems, certain regulatory and practical gaps remain, particularly concerning biometric applications. The paper argues that legal certainty, regulatory coherence and effective institutional coordination are essential for the compliant implementation of AI technologies. The comparison demonstrates that the EU rights-based model and the Chinese state-centric model produce significantly different implications for the protection of personal data and fundamental rights 11:15 - 11:30    Break  11:30 - 12:30    3rd panel  1. D. Krivokapic, A. Nikolić, I. Živković (Fakultet organizacionih nauka, Belgrade, Serbia) Regulatory Approaches to the Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Work Environment  The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on various aspects of everyday life and work is already evident, and the work environment is no exception. However, the specificity of this area is that it opens many important questions that primarily concern the regulation of the use of AI in this area, but also many others that are at the intersection of labour law, ethics and organisational management. Therefore, this paper aims to analyse the existing regulatory frameworks governing the development, implementation, and oversight of AI systems in employer–employee relations. Special attention is paid to distinguishing normative layers through which AI can be regulated: provisions of employment contracts, internal rules of the employer, collective bargaining mechanisms, as well as areas that should remain subject to the so-called soft regulations (recommendations, guidelines, ethical codes). Through this paper, we will analyse the most common practices in the work environment for which AI systems are used, including personnel selection, performance evaluation, algorithmic work management, productivity monitoring, and security supervision, and consider appropriate legal interventions for each of them. The focus is on issues of algorithm transparency, legal bases, employee-informed consent, data processing limitations, the execution of employees' rights, and protection against discrimination. The paper also examines the possibilities for collective bargaining on AI-related policies, including the role of trade unions in risk assessment, joint data management, and procedural safeguards. In conclusion, the paper demonstrates that effective regulation of AI at work requires a layered, hybrid approach that combines binding legal norms, organisational policies and ethical standards. Such a model enables the protection of employees' rights, encourages the responsible application of AI technologies, and simultaneously provides a stable framework for innovation and improvement of work processes. 2. P. Loutocky, F. Kasl, V. Stupka (Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic) Licence to Verify: Governance and the Risk of Function Creep in Age‑Verification Ecosystems  The year 2025 marked a major progress in the systemic approach to child-protection on the online platforms in the EU and beyond. The cornerstones are the Commission guidelines for Article 28 DSA (C/2025/6826) and the blueprint for an age verification solution. This “mini-wallet” pilot foreshadows the future use-case for the EU Digital Identity Wallet, which may be transformative for the interaction of minors with the digital ecosystem. The ambition in protecting the minors from harmful content while preserving their privacy is bound to reliable solutions employing selective disclosure and double blind issuance of a cryptographic proof that a user meets an age threshold, without revealing unnecessary data about their identity. We also stress out postquantum cryptography (PQC) as a forward-looking requirement for crypto-agile wallet governance to sustain integrity and privacy guarantees. Yet on the flip side of the coin, it is unclear, if the personal data processing limits are applicable to the use of such proof by the verifiers once received, such as for targeted advertising, recommender system tuning, group profiling, or cross service user tracking. Our contribution explores if there is a governance gap in the regulatory framework and what would be suitable step to ensure that age proofs are used solely for child protection purposes. 3. N. Mike (Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary) Anatomy of a Data Breach: Hungary  In October 2025, approximately 200,000 users' personal data—including names, addresses, phone numbers, and geolocation coordinates—were leaked from Tisza Világ, a mobile application operated by Hungary's leading opposition party. What followed transcended a typical data protection incident: the leaked data was transformed into an interactive map displaying supporters' locations at street level, disseminated by pro-government media, and instrumentalized for political intimidation through public "listing" of opposition sympathizers. This study aims to provide a multi-perspective analysis of the incident. Our methodology combines sentiment analysis of social media discourse—particularly Reddit threads where affected individuals shared experiences—with comparative framing analysis of media coverage across Hungary's polarized media landscape and document analysis of regulatory communications. To triangulate these findings, we seek to conduct interviews with representatives from the Hungarian data protection authority and the affected party, as well as an independent data protection expert. The case is situated within the broader framework of GDPR enforcement and Hungarian criminal law. The case offers a critical lens for understanding how data breaches become tools of political pressure in polarized democracies, contributing to literature on digital authoritarianism and chilling effects on political participation. 4. H. Lisičar, T. Katulić, M. Jurić (Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia) Challenges in the Implementation of the DSA in Croatia: Inter-Agency Cooperation and the Legal Mandate of HAKOM as Digital Services Coordinator  The adoption of the Act Implementing DSA Regulation 2022/2065 (Official Gazette NN 67/2025) is a landmark development for Croatian digital governance. While the European Digital Services Act (DSA) creates a single liability regime for online platforms on the EU level, it leaves procedural implementation to the discretion of member states. This paper critically examines Croatia’s decision to designate the Croatian Regulatory Agency for Network Industries (HAKOM) as the central Digital Services Coordinator (DSC). The study aims to analyze the legal and operational sustainability of this choice, exploring how HAKOM—an agency traditionally focused on electronic communications and competition—adapts to a new hybrid mandate. Crucially, it investigates the necessary cooperation between HAKOM and other competent authorities designated to issue orders regarding illegal content and information requests. 12:30 - 13:00    Break  13:00 - 14:00    4th panel  1. L. Vejmelka (Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Pravni Fakultet, Zagreb, Croatia), R. Matković (Institute for Public Health, Split, Croatia), T. Ramljak (Center for missing and exploited children, Osijek, Croatia), M. Rajter (Sveučilište u Zagreb, Pravni fakultet, Zagreb, Croatia), S. Hinek (Center for missing and exploited children, Osijek, Croatia) Strategic and Legal Developments for the Protection of Children’s Rights in the Digital Environment: Evidence-Based Support for Parental Engagement and National Implementation in Croatia  Recent European strategic and legal developments have strengthened the framework for protecting children’s rights in the digital environment, emphasizing safer online experiences, platform accountability, and shared responsibility among institutions, schools, and families. However, the effectiveness of these measures depends on their practical implementation at the national level. This paper connects current regulatory priorities with empirical findings from the Croatian deSHAME II study conducted among parents of primary and secondary school students. The results reveal significant differences in parental mediation by age: parents of younger children more frequently set rules, monitor online activities, and restrict access to harmful content, while parents of adolescents show lower levels of supervision and fewer structured safety practices. These disparities indicate an important gap between regulatory expectations and parental capacity. The paper proposes ways to strengthen national implementation through targeted parental support and coordinated institutional responses. It highlights ongoing Croatian initiatives, including the Advisory Mechanism for the Protection of Children in the Digital Environment led by HAKOM and the work of the Croatian Safer Internet Centre. By combining legal analysis with quantitative evidence, the study offers recommendations for improving enforcement, prevention strategies, and parental engagement to better protect children’s digital rights and safety. 2. V. Kruljac (University North, Varaždin, Croatia), M. Grabar Kruljac ( Varaždin Medical School, Varaždin, Croatia) Legal Grounds for Restricting Social Media Access for Users under 16: EU and Croatian Law Perspectives  The widespread use of social media by minors has become a major legal and regulatory concern due to its impact on mental health, privacy, and exposure to harmful content. Recent legislative initiatives proposing age-based restrictions on access to social media platforms have reignited debate within the European Union regarding the limits of permissible regulation. This paper examines whether a general prohibition on social media access for users under the age of 16 can be legally justified under EU law and Croatian law. The analysis focuses on the Digital Services Act, data protection rules applicable to minors, and relevant constitutional principles, particularly proportionality, freedom of expression, and the right to information. Comparative regulatory developments outside the EU are considered to illustrate enforcement challenges related to age verification and platform responsibility. The paper argues that although the protection of minors represents a legitimate public interest objective, blanket age-based bans raise serious concerns regarding fundamental rights and legal certainty. It concludes that a regulatory model centered on enhanced platform obligations, parental involvement, and targeted protective measures provides a more proportionate and legally sustainable approach within the EU legal order. 3. M. Portner Marinković, T. Katulić (University of Zagreb Faculty of Law, Zagreb, Croatia) Cybersecurity Requirements for SMEs under the New Croatian Cybersecurity Law: Addressing Human Resource Capacity Challenges through Outsourcing and the Virtual CISO Model  The NIS2 Directive establishes a comprehensive legal framework to ensure a high level of cybersecurity across the EU. In response to the rapidly evolving cyber threat landscape, it introduces stricter cybersecurity requirements for essential and important entities across 18 critical sectors. The new regulatory requirements governing cybersecurity risk-management measures, as evidenced by their detailed national transposition in Croatia, demonstrate that cybersecurity governance now involves increasingly complex organizational tasks and cannot be considered the exclusive responsibility of “IT departments”. Essential and important entities should establish an appropriate organizational structure that ensures a clear allocation of roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity, entrusted to individuals possessing the requisite professional competencies. This is one of the critical factors directly influencing the effective operationalization of their cybersecurity obligations and, consequently, the successful implementation and overall effectiveness of the new legal framework. For small and medium-sized entities, meeting these organizational requirements is expected to be particularly challenging. This paper analyses which SMEs fall within the scope of the Croatian Cybersecurity Act, and the roles and responsibilities required to ensure compliance with the obligations under the Act, with special emphasis on outsourcing as a practical organizational solution, using the virtual CISO services as an example 4. M. Smoljić (University North, Koprivnica, Croatia), Š. Savić (Attorney-at-law, Zagreb, Croatia) Legal Framework for Digital Authorization in Corporate Banking - SWIFT 3SKey in a Multibank Environment  This paper analyses the legal framework governing digital authorization in corporate banking, with particular emphasis on the evidentiary scope of digital authorization in a multibank environment. It proceeds from the thesis that technical validation of a SWIFT message and legally relevant authorization of a transaction are not identical categories, and that online certificates, including ACK reports, prove the transmission event, but do not in themselves prove the identity, authority, or legally relevant intent of the authorized person. The paper applies a doctrinal, review-based, and normative-contractual approach to the European regulatory framework (eIDAS, PSD2, and the RTS on SCA) and to the contractual documentation governing SWIFT 3SKey. The principal finding is that legal certainty in digital payment processes can be achieved only where the technical identity infrastructure is connected to a complete chain of evidence, an audit trail, and a clearly regulated bank–client relationship. The contribution of the paper lies in distinguishing the technical and legal scope of digital authorization and in identifying the contractual and evidentiary prerequisites required to prove authorization ex post. 14:00 - 15:15    5th panel  1. J. Mutabžija (PAR University of Applied Sciences, Rijeka, Croatia) Brain-Computer Interfaces and Evidence-Taking: Dehumanisation Risks in Croatian Procedural Law  This paper examines brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) as a potential evidentiary phenomenon within Croatian procedural law. It analyzes BCI-generated outputs as probabilistic digital representations of neural activity and conceptualizes them as a distinct evidentiary object, functionally closer to testimonial than to material evidence. The paper argues that, regardless of technical reliability, the algorithmic mediation through which cognitive states are transformed into evidentiary form creates systemic tensions with core procedural principles and gives rise to risks of dehumanization in adjudication. In particular, BCI-based evidence affects the free evaluation of evidence, the privilege against self-incrimination, and the principles of immediacy, orality, and adversarial participation. The central difficulty lies not primarily in accuracy, but in the technological mediation of mental content. The paper concludes by proposing safeguards de lege ferenda to preserve the human-centered character of adjudication. 2. N. Babić (Odvjetnički ured Natalija Babić, Zagreb, Croatia) Prijedlog Digitalnog omnibusa i Opća uredba o zaštiti podataka: pravna analiza odabranih prijedloga izmjena  19. studenoga 2025. Europska komisija službeno je predstavila svoj Digitalni omnibus paket, odnosno prijedlog za sveobuhvatnu digitalnu uredbu koja ima za cilj sveobuhvatno ažurirati digitalni regulatorni okvir EU, uključujući Opću uredbu o zaštiti podataka (GDPR). Rad se fokusira na pravnu analizu odabranih prijedloga izmjena GDPR‑a, osobito na dopunu definicije osobnih podataka, uvođenje definicije znanstvenog istraživanja te proširenje iznimaka za obradu posebnih kategorija osobnih podataka. Cilj rada je, polazeći od doktrinarne i normativne pravne analize, ispitati u kojoj su mjeri predložene izmjene usklađene s postojećim acquis communautaire EU u području zaštite osobnih podataka i temeljnih prava. Metodološki, rad kombinira analitičko‑komparativnu usporedbu prijedloga Digitalnog omnibusa s važećim tekstom GDPR‑a, relevantnom sudskom praksom Suda Europske unije te mišljenjem Europskog odbora za zaštitu podataka (EDPB) i Europskog nadzornika za zaštitu podataka (EDPS). Analiza pokazuje da pojedine odredbe, osobito u pogledu pseudonimiziranih podataka, znanstvenog istraživanja i obrade posebnih kategorija osobnih podataka u kontekstu sustava umjetne inteligencije, mogu dovesti do povećane pravne neizvjesnosti i zahtijevaju dodatna normativna pojašnjenja kako bi se očuvala postojeća razina zaštite prava ispitanika. 3. J. Klasinc (Croatian Institute of Public Administration, Zagreb, Croatia) New Croatian Construction Act and Buliding Information Modelling (BIM)  This paper is analysis of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in new Construction Act in Croatia, and should be regarded as a policy paper as well as comparative study. The new Construction Act came into force with the beginning of 2026 and has introduced e-Permits and other novelties, including BIM as an obligatory method for construction planning that involves projecting and planning, investment and construction (execution of works) in a single 3D Instrument. BIM was introduced into the EU legislation by the Directive 2014/24/EU for public procurement as a nonobligatory recommended method and so far the harmonization of this standard within the EU and its country members has not been achieved. So far it is obligatory only in Finland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden (partially), France (gradually by sector) and in Italy (by phases according to the value of the project) and it is recommended in Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Austria. It is therefore recommended as a method when it comes to EU funded projects. The EU recommendations are based on same standards in terms of same principles and standards (e.g. ISO 19650, IFC /open BIM, CDE). However, Croatian legal system is more rulebased and the Act is only the first step towards putting legal standard into practice. This could lead to certain adverse outcomes, so the comparison with other countries is useful. 4. K. Šolić ( J.J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Medicine, Osijek, Croatia), A. Kraljik (University of Applied Sciences Lavoslav Ružička in Vukovar, Vukovar, Croatia), B. Herceg Pakšić (J.J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Law, Osijek, Croatia), T. Velki (J.J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Education, Osijek, Croatia) Knowledge Gaps Among Medical and Law Students regarding the Anonymization and the Pseudonymization in Healthcare Data  The anonymization and pseudonymization of the healthcare data are mandatory concerns for the privacy protection. The aim of this study was to examine the level of knowledge and potential differences between medical and law students. Data were collected using a questionnaire composed of a subscale measuring online risk awareness, a subscale assessing the perceived importance of healthcare data protection, and open-ended questions evaluating knowledge about anonymization and privacy protection, with demographic questions. The results showed that only 18.9% of students knew what anonymization is, while none of them knew what pseudonymization is. Unexpectedly, medical students had somewhat better level of knowledge. Nevertheless, the overall median score on open-ended knowledge questions was low, with median equals 4 (IQR: 2-5, highest score 8), while maximum possible score was 12. Participants were unable to prioritize between privacy protection and advancement of scientific knowledge. In addition, significant but weak correlation was identified between the level of knowledge and the perceived importance of healthcare data protection. Both groups of students were enrolled in the second year of study; however, the observed low level of knowledge is concerning. These findings also indicate that young people possess insufficient knowledge regarding privacy protection. 15:15 - 15:30    Closing

Basic information:

Ivana Kanceljak (Croatia), Tihomir Katulić (Croatia), Hrvoje Lisičar (Croatia), Lucija Vejmelka (Croatia)

Agnieszka Besiekierska (Poland), Jarosław Greser (Poland), Nina Gumzej (Croatia), Tihomir Katulić (Croatia), Đorđe Krivokapić (Serbia), Ivana Kunda (Croatia), Hrvoje Lisičar (Croatia), Pavel Loutocky (Czech Republic), Romana Matanovac Vučković (Croatia), Nimrod Mike (Hungary), Melita Milenković (Croatia), Hrvoje Stančić (Croatia), Lucija Vejmelka (Croatia), Goran Vojković (Croatia), Aleš Završnik (Slovenia) 

Marko Jurić (Croatia), Tihomir Katulić (Croatia), Hrvoje Lisičar (Croatia), Melita Milenković (Croatia), Lucija Vejmelka (Croatia)

Registration / Fees:

No paper presentation fee is 165 EUR (180 EUR from 12 May).

The student discount doesn't apply to PhD students.

NOTE FOR AUTHORS: In order to have your paper published, it is required that you pay at least one registration fee for each paper. Authors of 2 or more papers are entitled to a 10% discount.

Tihomir Katulic
University of Zagreb
Faculty of Law
Trg Republike Hrvatske 14
HR-10000 Zagreb, Croatia

E-mail: tkatulic@gmail.com
 

The best papers will get a special award.
Accepted papers will be published in the ISSN registered conference proceedings.