The following letter by Members of Parliament from across the EU has been sent today (and is still open for signatures):

Dear Council of the European Union,
Dear national governments,

In the last days of the Belgian EU Council Presidency, Belgium has put forward its final initiative to reach a general approach in the Council of the EU regarding the highly contested CSA regulation (Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual abuse). In possibly putting the CSA Regulation to a vote on 19 June, the Council is risking far more than just passing a simple regulation.

Sexual abuse and the exploitation of children, including the dissemination of child sexual abuse material, must be addressed with the utmost determination in accordance with the rule of law. While the regulation proposal put forward by the EU Commission includes some good and crucial measures, such as the EU center, it is highly questionable whether core aspects of the regulation are compatible with European fundamental rights.

As parliamentarians, we observe with great concern the proposal of the Council of the EU that would put to an end the confidentiality of private communication. Even if the Belgian Council Presidency has now presented a compromise proposal that would limit the obligation to scanning private unencrypted as well as encrypted video and image content, it remains just as much an encroachment on fundamental digital rights and takes the discussion back to the origin of the debate. In fact, the Belgian proposal represents the Commission’s first plans that came to light in December 2021.

Safe and encrypted communication is of utmost importance for every human being. This also accounts for children and victims of sexual abuse to allow for safe emergency and help services – particularly in countries where victim support organisations cannot rely on the support and confidentiality of state law enforcement authorities.

Besides risking to contradict the aim of the CSA proposal by intervening in the digital self-determination of people, there might be several unintentional but dangerous side effects:

• Client Side Scanning (CSS) and any other mass surveillance, would render confidential information carriers impossible: Scanning would affect users who rely on confidential communication and whose communication is particularly protected (professionals bound by confidentiality such as journalists, lawyers, the medical sector, but also whistleblowers). Furthermore, built-in backdoors could compromise the confidentiality of digitally transmitted trade secrets and business transactions. Encryption protects the identity and the contents of communication participants, thus preserving the autonomy of victims of sexual violence.
• Democratic society and democratic debate need trustworthy spaces: Democratic societies need privacy for the formation of opinions and will. The proposed measures carry the danger of leading to self-censorship, jeopardizing safe spaces for children and victims of sexual violence, but also for everyone else. It will also likely leave to users unwilling to use digital services and lose trust in providers if their data is not secure and protected.
• Blueprint for authoritarian states and weakening cybersecurity: By building an architecture capable of undermining all possibility of private digital communication, the regulation might inadvertently serve as a blueprint for surveillance in authoritarian states and can serve as a built-in backdoor that can easily be exploited for all sorts of surveillance practices (e.g. trade secrets) and cybercriminals. Once built, this IT-architecture is an invitation to undermine privacy.
• Impairment of digital educational, youth, and assistance services: It will eliminate the common practice to exchange important sexual health information to such education as is case in some European countries.

The mandatory investigation of private communication messages without suspicion carries the risk of creating a climate of general suspicion. Such an approach will irreparably damage the image of the European Union as a guarantor of freedom.

We explicitly warn that the obligation to systematically scan encrypted communication, whether called “upload-moderation” or “client-side scanning”, would not only break secure end-to-end encryption, but will to a high probability also not withstand the case law of the European Court of Justice. Rather, such an attack would be in complete contrast to the European commitment to secure communication and digital privacy, as well as human rights in the digital space.

We therefore urgently need an approach that prioritizes the protection and prevention of child sexual abuse, provides more resources and better-targeted coordination of European law enforcement authorities, strengthens victim support in accordance with fundamental rights, and avoids relying on a false sense of security through technosolutionism.

As national and European parliamentarians, we are convinced that the proposed measures are incompatible with European fundamental rights. We are committed to safeguarding the right to anonymous and pseudonymous use of the internet, as well as strengthening end-to-end encryption.

We urgently call on all negotiating governments in the COREPER to reject a general approach based on compromise proposal that Belgium has put forward.

Signatories

Tobias B. Bacherle, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Konstantin von Notz, MP & Vice Chair of the group, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Süleyman Zorba, MP, The Greens, Austria

Maximilian Funke-Kaiser, MP, FDP, Germany

Konstantin Kuhle, MP & Vice Chair of the group, FDP, Germany

Sven Clement, MP, Pirates, Luxembourg

Patrick Breyer, MEP, Pirates, Germany

Marketa Gregorová, MEP, Pirates, Czech Republic

Marcel Kolaja, MEP, Pirates, Czech Republic

Rasmus Andresen, MEP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Maik Außendorf, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Michael Bloss, MEP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Damian Boeselager, MEP, Volt, Germany

Georg Bürstmayr, MP, The Greens, Austria

Marcel Emmerich, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Emilia Fester, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Alexandra Geese, MEP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Stefan Gelbhaar, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Andreas Glück, MEP, FDP, Germany

Sabine Grützmacher, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Svenja Hahn, MEP, FDP, Germany

Katrin Helling-Plahr, MP, FDP, Germany

Manuel Höferlin, MP, FDP, Germany

Misbah Khan, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Moritz Körner, MEP, FDP, Germany

Katharina Kucharowits, MP, SPÖ, Austria

Denise Loop, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Boris Mijatovic, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Maximilian Mordhorst, MP, FDP, Germany

Hannah Neumann, MEP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Dr. Nikolaus Scherak, MP, NEOS, Austria

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, MEP, FDP, Germany

Tabea Rößner, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Michael Sacher, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Kordula Schulz-Asche, MP, Alliance 90/The Greens, Germany

Kim van Sparrentak, MEP, Greens, Netherlands

Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, MP, FDP, Germany

Council is to greenlight #Chatcontrol 2.0 on Thursday!

Don‘t let them get away with quietly pushing this through right after the #EuropeanElections. Sound the alarm and contact the representatives of your government NOW! Contact details and additional informationContact details and additional information

Contact details and additional information

patrick-breyer.de/en/lawmakers…

Today, the European Parliament adopted the trilogue deal on the extension of the controversial, error-prone voluntary bulk scanning of private messages and photos for suspected content by US internet companies until April 2026. This extension, known as #ChatControl 1.0 or interim ePrivacy derogation regulation, was now carelessly adopted in a fast-track procedure before the European elections. Initially, the European Parliament majority aimed to extend the regulation by only 9 months to swiftly transition to targeted surveillance of suspects and a more effective approach to protecting children. However, today’s deal extends the status quo by more than twice the period originally envisioned, prompting criticism from Pirate Party MEPs, who have long advocated against this unprecedented mass surveillance tool.

Patrick Breyer, Member of the European Parliament for the German Pirate Party, comments:

“The EU Parliament’s decision to extend blanket chat control contradicts its stated goal of protecting fundamental rights. Moreover, this deal fails to provide a stronger and court-proof protection against child sexual abuse. Victims deserve better. Bulk scanning makes no significant contribution to saving abused children or convicting perpetrators of abuse. Instead, it exposes thousands of minors to potential criminalization, overburdens law enforcement, and facilitates arbitrary private justice by internet companies. As a Pirate, I am working to stop the illegal bulk chat control scanning in court. We will be watching every move of the EU Council which aims at adopting the extreme dystopia of mandatory chat control 2.0 to destroy digital privacy of correspondence and secure encryption.”

Marcel Kolaja, Member and Quaestor of the European Parliament for the Czech Pirate Party, comments:

“Child sexual abuse on the Internet is a severe problem that we should be addressing with all urgency. Unfortunately, the debate on this important issue has become an endless battle for our privacy. As a result, we still do not have an effective framework for the protection of children. Something that we should have put in place years ago. Instead, the Commission is doing unsystematic steps by giving the companies that have historically treated our private data the worst the power to invade our privacy and read all our online messages however they please. They say it’s with children’s safety in mind. However, those internet services have been snooping into people’s private communications for years now and we have seen no convincing evidence that this has actually helped to anything. To think that extending this exemption, the legality of which I strongly doubt, will do more good than it will do harm is naïve to say the least.”

Find more information on www.ChatControl.eu

patrick-breyer.de/en/chatcontr…

Today, the European Parliament supported a one-year extension of the temporary derogation from the ePrivacy Directive, also known as Chat Control 1.0. The regulation allows for untargeted, general and indiscriminate searches of private messages by US big tech companies, aiming to detect suspicious content. Pirate Party Members of the European Parliament have long advocated and campaigned against this error-prone and arbitrary technology, which represents the end of the privacy of digital correspondence and fails to provide effective solutions against grooming.

Patrick Breyer, Member of the European Parliament for the German Pirate Party, comments:

“After Pirates have successfully defused the #ChatControl 2.0 mass surveillance fantasies of Commissioner Ylva Johansson, this extension of untargeted, general and indiscriminate chat control is the admission of failure to protect children better and in line with our fundamental rights. Instead of taking up the EU Parliament’s new approach for more effective and court-proof child protection without mass surveillance, Johansson is incorrigibly insisting in the destruction of digital privacy of correspondence, playing for time and hoping to manipulate critical EU states into agreeing by running infamous campaigns and spreading misinformation. The extension of indiscriminate and general #ChatControl 1.0, no matter by how long, will only be the first precedent and indiscriminate searches in our personal messages and photos by US Big Tech will de facto become the permanent solution.”

Marcel Kolaja, Member and Quaestor of the European Parliament for the Czech Pirate Party, comments:

“Most of us are probably no longer under any illusions about how tech giants approach user privacy. That’s why I find it completely irresponsible that they have a tool in their hands that allows them to look into everyone’s private messages. We have laws that guarantee privacy for a reason. And to exempt those who have historically been the least responsible with our personal data is ridiculous. Of course, we need to protect children, who are being targeted by predators on the Internet. However, in all the time that some Internet services have been snooping in people’s private communication, we have seen no convincing evidence that it has actually helped to successfully protect children. Instead, this dogged effort at blanket snooping is blocking steps that could actually help. That is why we should unequivocally reject chat control, both now as a voluntary tool and later as a compulsory one, and finally take real action to help children.”

Today’s plenary vote had been requested by the Pirate’s group Greens/EFA. Negotiations on the extension are to be concluded next week in a fast-track procedure. Breyer is suing Meta in court to stop the scanning.

In the meantime, the Belgian Council Presidency intends to pursue the proposal to make chat control scanning mandatory for all providers, even services that are so far securely end-to-end encrypted (Chat Control 2.0). EU interior ministers are to discuss the Council’s position on 5 March.

patrick-breyer.de/en/pirates-v…

Today, the EU Commissioner for Home Affairs, Ylva Johansson, had to answer to the LIBE Committee in the course of the lobbying affair concerning Chat control (#ChatControlGate)[1]. Last month, several European media outlets had revealed the close involvement of lobbyists in the preparation of the controversial regulation on sexual child abuse and the interconnections of the EU Commission with a foreign network.[2] Johansson was asked countless critical questions from all parliamentary groups, but she insisted no mistakes had been made. It would only be examined whether she had violated the Digital Services Act with an emotional advertising campaign in member states that reject her Chat control proposal as it stands.

Pirate Party MEP Patrick Breyer, digital freedom fighter and co-negotiator of the proposed regulation, comments:

“It was only to be expected that Johansson would respond to the revelations with her usual propaganda, such as citing a biased and suggestive Eurobarometer survey that violates the rules of good public opinion research.”[1]

“In order to really hold Johansson accountable for her foreign-influenced bill and her lobbying in office, my committee, on our initiative, has demanded full access to all correspondence of her office with lobbying organisations – such as the secret letters of the dubious US foundation Thorn. Only then can we see the full extent of the entanglement with our own eyes.

“We are having the Legal Service look into legal action against the EU Commission for unfair influence and pressure on the legislative process through targeted false advertising in critical countries. And I have today lodged a complaint with the EU Ombudsman.

“The European Data Protection Supervisor is already investigating. We will hold Ms Johansson accountable for her crimes against our fundamental rights and our democracy!”

—

Breyer’s question to Johansson in the LIBE Committee today was:

“It is about #ChatControl Gate today, about your links with a foreign lobby network, so close that you wrote to the Thorn boss yourself: ‘The regulation I propose is a strong European response. Without your help we would not have come this far.’

May I congratulate you on your new side job as a surveillance influencer on the internet? Recently, you actually dared to try to put pressure on critical member states in the current legislative process by means of a targeted emotional disinformation campaign using taxpayers’ money.

What would you actually say if Parliament were to place targeted advertisements in your home country, Sweden, in order to criticise your authoritarian Chat control proposal, which is contrary to fundamental rights?

Have you lost all respect for democracy and your role in the legislative process?

If these methods are really as normal as you write, when else did you purposefully pressure specific countries?

The best thing about your scandalous methods is that they have failed politically in the Council and also in Parliament.

We will hold you accountable for your illegal methods! Our legal service is examining a possible lawsuit against the EU Commission . Today I have lodged a complaint with the EU Ombudsman.”

[1] patrick-breyer.de/en/breyer-on…

[2] balkaninsight.com/2023/09/25/w…

[3] patrick-breyer.de/en/chat-cont…

patrick-breyer.de/en/chat-cont…

Today, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen delivered her annual State of the European Union address to the EU Parliament in Strasbourg. In her speech, she hailed adopted (Digital Services Act, Digital Markets Act) and planned digital laws (AI Act) and announced the formation of an expert group on Artificial Intelligence (AI). Pirate Party MEP and digital expert Patrick Breyer counters:

“Ms. von der Leyen is the conservative Commission president whose term of office must soon finally come to an end, but who will have done plenty of mischief by then: because she uncritically cheers digitization, wants to burn our data in the profit interest of industry, and simply did not understand the digital age.

„The von der Leyen Commission regularly proves with its unethical legislative proposals that it is trampling on the fundamental rights of EU citizens. With the Digital Services Act, von der Leyen has virtually given her blessing to the surveillance capitalism of the tech industry. The fact that she now wants to let representatives of these corporations help shape Europe’s future in the area of Artificial Intelligence fits in well with the picture. With her proposal for an AI Act, she wants to open the door to biometric mass surveillance in public.

“On the one hand, Ms. von der Leyen keeps official text messages with the head of Pfizer about billion-dollar deals secret bypassing all rules, but on the other hand she wants to have our private messages indiscriminatly scanned by unreliable suspicion machines via #ChatControl and destroy the digital secrecy of correspondence. She is the conservative commission president whose appointment we Pirates have rejected from the start.

„Ms. von der Leyen is remembered by many young Germans as ‘Zensursula’. With an emotional fear campaign, she tried years ago to push through an ineffective and harmful Internet censorship law, ignoring mass protests and criticism from academia. In 2015, she voted in the Bundestag to reintroduce blanket data retention, even though the European Court of Justice had ruled it disproportionate. Nothing at all comes from her on curbing lobbying, more transparency and genuine citizen participation. The Pirate Party demands for all these reasons that she finally leave next year.”

Breyer concludes by referring to a tweet by Edward Snowden a few weeks ago about the planned chat control: “It seems that in just ten years, the EU institutions have transformed from ‘our best hope for a sincere guarantor of global human rights’ into ‘an authoritarian cabal that vigorously advocates the global, machine-enforced restriction of basic human freedoms.'”

patrick-breyer.de/en/breyer-vo…

In the dispute over plans to search all private messages and photos (#ChatControl) for suspicious content, a proposal by the Spanish presidency has been leaked that ambassadors will discuss on Thursday and is intended to secure a majority for the proposed #ChatControl regulation at the end of the month.

Pirate Party MEP and lawyer Patrick Breyer, who is co-negotiating the bill in the European Parliament, has read the proposal and warns:

“The lip service paid to end-to-end encryption is a mere smokescreen. Communication services like WhatsApp or Signal would still have to turn our smartphones into error-prone scanners and bugs (so-called client-side scanning). Nobody would be able to rely on the subsequent encryption of ‘unsuspicious’ messages.

“What the EU governments want to adopt on 28 September means: Apart from ineffective network blocking and search engine censorship, the proposed chat control threatens to destroy digital privacy of correspondence and secure encryption. Scanning personal cloud storage would result in the mass surveillance of private photos. Mandatory age verification for communications services would end anonymous communication. Appstore censorship for young people would be a kind of digital house arrest for teenagers. The proposal does not include the overdue obligation on law enforcement agencies to report and remove known abusive material on the Internet, nor does it provide for Europe-wide standards for effective prevention measures, victim support and counselling and effective criminal investigations.

“This Big Brother attack on our mobile phones, private messages and photos with the help of error-prone algorithms is a giant step towards a Chinese-style surveillance state. Chat control is like the post office opening and scanning all letters – ineffective and illegal. Even the most intimate nude photos and sex chats can suddenly end up with company personnel or the police. Those who destroy the digital secrecy of letters destroy trust. We all depend on the security and confidentiality of private communication: People in need, victims of abuse, children, the economy and also state authorities.”

patrick-breyer.de/en/chat-cont…

Quando un fisico come Carlo Rovelli parla di geopolitica non è ovviamente una voce autorevole, ma ha un'indiscutibile autorevolezza quando parla del suo confrontarsi continuamente con una comunità internazionale eterogenea di ricercatori iperscolarizzati!

@Politica interna, europea e internazionale

Rovelli appartiene infatti a una classe sociale privilegiata, un'intersezione di competenze STEM di alto livello, attenzione alle dinamiche sociali ma senza fare politica, cosmopolitismo, multiculturalismo. E chiunque abbia frequentato quel tipo di persone sa che questo è il loro modo di pensare.Vede più lontano di noi.

Vede che il mondo è molto "più grande di quella che si autodefinisce comunità internazionale" e dire che quel mondo non è sbagliato (sì, sto banalizzando Luca Sofri) solo perché non rispetta i diritti umani o il diritto internazionale, è un errore

Un errore perché i "valori" dell'Occidente sono messi a dura prova proprio dalla classe dirigente dell'Occidente.3 esempi: il primo coinvolge tutto l'Occidente, un consesso che ha deciso di fare strame del #DirittoAllaConoscenza perseguitando #Assange

Il secondo riguarda l'Europa, sempre più tentata dalla sorveglianza di massa, utilizzando come scusa il terrorismo con #TERREG e la lotta alla pedopornografia con #Chatcontrol e (se escludiamo la Germania) nel più totale silenzio della politica

Il terzo ci riguarda da vicino, con il governo italiano che, forse nell'intento di innestarsi una coda ignifuga, stralcia i "crimini contro l'umanità" dal ddl di adeguamento del codice penale allo Statuto di Roma. Si vis impunitatem, para legem...

Ma sono così tante le occasioni in cui l'Occidente smentisce sé stesso: guerre di aggressione a stati sovrani con milioni di morti civili innocenti, abbandono dei migranti, persecuzione dei whistleblower, affari con tiranni sanguinari, repressione dei manifestanti!

Il concetto di Occidente può avere ancora senso nel rispetto dei diritti umani, i diritti civili e i diritti sociali. Se vogliamo dimostrare la propria superiorità verso il resto del mondo, iniziamo a farlo accogliendo quegli sfollati e dissidenti che vorrebbero raggiungerci.

Se l'Occidente è democrazia, allora invece di "esportarla", inizi a consolidarla al proprio interno migliorando gli strumenti di partecipazione democratica e invertendo l'attuale tendenza che tende a dare potere, istruzione e salute solo a una minoranza di pochi ricchi.

Non ascolteremo perciò Carlo Rovelli come esperto di geopolitica, ma il suo punto di vista sarà interessante da ascoltare sia in sé, sia per tutti i tentativi che ne seguiranno per sterilizzarne la portata.

Il video completo dell'intervista su La7