With a narrow majority and after weeks of intense political tensions, the European Parliament has reopened a dossier that seemed closed. The Chamber approved the request for an urgent procedure to re-examine the extension of the so-called Chat Control 1.0, the derogation that allows online platforms to voluntarily monitor private communications to identify child sexual abuse material. A decision that brings back to the center of the debate the delicate balance between child protection, privacy protection, and respect for parliamentary procedures.
THE VOTE THAT REOPENS THE DOSSIER
With 331 votes in favor, 304 against, and 11 abstentions, the Eurochamber approved the request for an urgent procedure to examine the extension of the derogation to the ePrivacy regulation, which expired last April. The measure would allow messaging service providers and digital platforms to continue detecting, reporting, and removing child sexual abuse material and cases of online grooming, pending the approval of a permanent regulatory framework.
The substantive vote is scheduled for Thursday, the last day of the plenary session before the summer break.
WHAT “CHAT CONTROL 1.0” PROVIDES
The temporary derogation authorizes, on a voluntary basis, operators such as Meta, Google, and Microsoft to derogate from European electronic communications privacy rules to analyze messages, images, and other content in search of child sexual abuse material, the so-called Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM). Without the extension, with the expiration of the derogation in April, platforms can no longer carry out these detection activities, except in cases permitted by ordinary legislation.
Meanwhile, negotiations are underway on a regulation intended to definitively replace the transitional system with a stable framework to combat online child sexual abuse.
METSOLA’S ESCAPADE
However, the reopening of the file is at the center of disputes. As Euronews recalls, in March the European Parliament had rejected the extension proposal put forward by the European Commission and let the derogation lapse.
“To solve the problem – writes Il Mattinale europeo –, the President of the European Parliament Roberta Metsola tasked her advisors with carefully examining the internal regulations. And they found a loophole: if the rejected proposal is put back for discussion in a second reading, only an absolute majority (360 votes) can block it. This is what will be at stake on Thursday at noon in the plenary. Metsola’s implicit hope is that, with the approach of the summer holidays, the Parliament benches will be even emptier than usual on the normal Thursdays of plenary weeks. Opponents of an extension of Chat Control until 2028 will therefore have more difficulty gathering 360 votes.”
REASONS OF THOSE SUPPORTING THE EXTENSION
The acceleration was mainly promoted by the European People’s Party (EPP), in favor of extending the temporary regime without changes until the entry into force of the definitive legislation. The group of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) also decided to support the urgent procedure, although registering several defections within, including the rapporteur of the measure Birgit Sippel and some Italian MEPs from the PD.
“Child sexual abuse is one of the most serious crimes imaginable. The S&D group will always fully support the fight against this crime. It is clear that Europe needs better laws to protect children and that such work is underway,” explained a spokesperson for the socialist group.
Also, four European Commissioners, according to EuPerspectives, urged MEPs to approve the extension, arguing that “stopping detection seriously weakens our collective ability to identify abuse, support victims, and stop offenders.”
CRITICISMS ON PRIVACY AND METHOD
The main objections, reports Ansa, come from the Greens, Renew, and numerous figures engaged in digital rights protection. According to critics, the extension risks compromising negotiations on the permanent regulation and consolidating a system based on indiscriminate scanning of private communications.
Green MEP Markéta Gregorová denounced the use of the urgent procedure, arguing that “this is no longer just about privacy protection, but about protecting our democracy,” accusing the EPP of bringing back “a proposal that Parliament had already rejected.”
Along the same lines, Patrick Breyer, former MEP and digital rights activist, stated that Parliament, in negotiations on the permanent regulation, had instead proposed a model based on detection orders targeting suspected individuals, rather than generalized checks carried out by platforms.
Also, Ignazio Marino, Green/ALE MEP, called the measure a form of “mass surveillance,” stating that “children are protected by intelligent law enforcement, not by scanning the private messages of millions of innocent people.”
THE FINE LINE BETWEEN PROTECTION AND PRIVACY THREAT
Scientists have also intervened in the debate. Researchers Carmela Troncoso and Bart Preneel urged MEPs to reject the urgent procedure, recalling previous appeals signed by over 800 scholars. In their view, currently available technologies still have high error margins, pose proportionality issues in scanning communications, and could be replaced by more targeted tools.
As Daniela Mainenti, associate professor of Comparative Criminal Procedure Law, also writes in Fatto Quotidiano, the illicit content detection system would require platforms to preemptively check users’ images, messages, and metadata, analyzing even lawful private communications to identify a limited amount of criminal content. Moreover, this would entail interference with privacy and data protection comparable to wiretapping but without the same judicial limits. But above all, according to Mainenti: “The result is a silent transfer of power. Not from the State to citizens. But from the State to large tech companies.”
