News Round-Up: EP Revives Chat Control; Germany Curbs Public Information Access; Dutch Wind Farms Halted Over Sea Eagle Deaths
Twice a week, the editorial team of Freedom Research compiles a round-up of news that caught our eye – or what felt like under-reported aspects of news deserving more attention.
Over the past few days, the following topics attracted our attention:
European Parliament Takes Up Chat Control Again
Germany Restricts Access to Public Information
Dutch Wind Farm Shuts Down 20 Turbines After Young Sea Eagle Killed
European Parliament Takes Up Chat Control Again
The European Parliament will once again vote this Thursday on a draft
proposal on the Chat Control bill that would allow tech companies to scan the messages of all Europeans, including potentially encrypted ones. Critics argue that such blanket scanning infringes on the privacy of all citizens, reports Euronews.
Yesterday (7 July), the European Parliament approved the request to process the Chat Control proposal under the urgent procedure. As a result, the draft will be voted on during the plenary session this Thursday - the last session before the summer recess. Unless an overwhelming majority of Parliament (at least 361 votes) votes against the draft, the text will be deemed adopted. This would extend message monitoring until 2028, giving technology companies the opportunity once again to scan messages sent by all Europeans without restrictions.
The EU introduced a temporary message monitoring measure in 2021 to combat child sexual abuse material (CSAM) online. The measure was intended to remain in effect only until a permanent law was adopted. However, the temporary legislation contains a controversial provision that allows large technology companies to scan people’s private texts and images to detect CSAM or potential child grooming. The temporary measure expired on 3 April 2026, although the European Commission had proposed a temporary extension. The European Parliament did not approve the solution but demanded amendments so that, in the case of private conversations, the scope would be limited to individuals suspected of criminal offenses and so that the automatic screening of unknown photos and chat histories using artificial intelligence would be excluded. Thus, while the Parliament did not directly reject message monitoring, it did seek to limit its scope.
The European People’s Party (EPP), the largest political group in the European Parliament, appears to have made it a priority to push through the extension of the regulation one way or another. This is despite the fact that many EPP members voted against the draft regulation in the spring. As early as 17 June, the EPP asked European Parliament President Roberta Metsola to continue the proceedings on the temporary measure. Metsola called on EU leaders to move forward with the draft, and last week, member states agreed to the temporary reinstatement of Chat Control. EPP Group leader Manfred Weber has now placed the draft bill on the Parliament’s agenda, but this version does not incorporate any of the amendments that Parliament had demanded as recently as this spring. Moreover, the EPP has this time resorted to a rarely used special procedure, submitting the original version to Parliament and requesting an accelerated procedure.
Under normal procedural rules, a draft text is adopted if an absolute majority of Members of the European Parliament - that is, at least 361 members - do not reject or amend it. However, if Parliament rejects the text, the Council will typically not proceed with it, and the text should be referred back to the European Commission. Now, however, there is a push to hold a plenary vote in Parliament without the Commission having amended the original text. That is, to vote again on the same version that was before Parliament this spring. Markéta Gregorová, a member of the Greens/EFA group, calls this procedure undemocratic and an attempt by the EPP to impose its priorities. According to Patrick Breyer, a former Member of the European Parliament and opponent of data surveillance, this is a procedural trick, the likelihood of success of which is increased by the upcoming recess and the resulting low attendance at sessions.
The conservative EPP group, however, justifies the requested fast-track procedure by arguing that, in the group’s view, there has been a massive legal loophole regarding the sexual abuse of children online since April. “We cannot accept this legal vacuum. We cannot let child abuse material go unnoticed and unreported, day after day,” the EPP states in its post.
Germany Restricts Access to Public Information
The German government has decided to decided to amend country’s Freedom of Information Act and plans to restrict public access to documents held by federal authorities and state agencies. Under the plan, individuals would have to demonstrate a “legitimate interest,” although this term is defined rather vaguely. But authorities would gain broad discretion to reject requests, writes Human Rights Watch.
Non-EU citizens, however, would not be entitled to request public documents at all, regardless of their ability to demonstrate a legitimate interest. The draft also proposes limiting access to private individuals (natural persons) only, which would prevent civil society organizations and the media from submitting requests in their own name. Furthermore, there are plans to raise the upper limit on fees for information requests, which currently stands at €500. This could deter many people who cannot afford potentially much higher costs reaching thousands of euros.
Currently, anyone in Germany can request documents from the government and other public authorities through the freedom of information process. Investigations by civil society and the media rely heavily on this opportunity, and in the past it has led to the exposure of numerous political and corruption scandals, including some involving officials of the current government - who are now determined to change the system. Last year, the ruling parties agreed in their coalition agreement to reform freedom of information, with the stated aim of providing “added value to citizens and administrative agencies.”
Almaz Teffera, senior researcher for Human Rights Watch in Europe, explained: “The German government seems to perceive transparency and freedom of information as threats and an administrative burden instead of essential safeguards in a democracy.” According to Teffera, restricting access to public documents deprives everyone of the opportunity to obtain information, makes it more difficult to hold officials accountable, and increases public distrust. Human Rights Watch is convinced that the current plan violates not only the government’s own commitments but also international law and European human rights standards. “The German government should reverse course on this dangerous pursuit to gut Germany’s Freedom of Information Act and preserve meaningful access to official records for individuals and organizations alike,” Teffera added.
FragDenStaat, a German civil society platform for freedom of information, called the plans “the most serious attack on state transparency in the history of the Federal Republic [of Germany].” Reporters Without Borders and German journalists’ networks have also criticized the plan, arguing that the government’s proposal hinders journalists’ access to information. According to these organizations, the authorities are attempting to limit the media’s ability to hold them accountable, as restricting access to public information makes the media’s work significantly more difficult.
The European Court of Human Rights has recognized that access to information is particularly important for journalists, civil society organizations, and others who monitor public life. However, this work is only possible if public documents are accessible. In the Court’s view, any restrictions must be lawful, necessary, and proportionate. Blanket exclusions, the redaction of officials’ names, and arbitrary rules run counter to transparent governance and threaten the fundamental pillars of a functioning democracy.
Dutch Wind Farm Shuts Down 20 Turbines After Young Sea Eagle Killed
In Zeeland, the Netherlands, a wind farm had to shut down its 20 wind turbines after two young sea eagles were killed by the turbine blades. Now, the wind turbines near Kreekraksluizen are not allowed to operate during the day for the next few months, according to DutchNews.
According to the environmental agency, a white-tailed eagle had already been killed at the same wind farm previously. Following the incident in April, the agency determined that the wind farm’s owner had failed to meet its obligations to protect endangered species. The wind farm is now required to shut down 20 of its turbines out of 33 during the day. However, they may operate at night, as birds generally do not fly then. In addition, the wind farm must install a bird detection system in the coming months that can slow the blades within seconds if a white-tailed eagle approaches.
According to the environmental agency, a pair of white-tailed eagles nests on Lake Markiezaatsmeer near Bergen op Zoom. Currently, two chicks there are almost ready to fledge. When they begin flying, the young birds are still very clumsy. On their way to their feeding grounds in the Oosterschelde, they must fly past the turbines, and the associated risk is too great.
Forester Erik de Jonge said that, unfortunately, white-tailed eagles rarely succeed in raising their chicks, and the species is protected. Therefore, efforts must be made to prevent the chicks from perishing. De Jonge hopes that although the current incidents are extremely sad, they may help to better regulate the issue in the future. It is worth noting that white-tailed eagles had not been seen nesting in the Netherlands for decades until 2006, when a single pair reappeared. In recent years, the population of white-tailed eagles in the country has gradually increased, and around 45 nesting pairs were recorded last year.