Chat Control on the brink of collapse: EU gets in its own way

Florian Bodoky

1.4.2026

Translation: Elicia Payne

Voluntary chat control in the EU has come to an end. A failed compromise and failed legal manoeuvre are to blame.

From 4 April 2026, this will (temporarily) come to an end: online platforms in the EU will no longer be allowed to scan private messages for depictions of child sexual abuse. What at first glance appears to be a step back in the battle against abuse, is the result of a complex political process. Data protection and law enforcement have failed to compromise and a procedural tactic backfired.

Voluntary chat control since 2021

The ePrivacy Directive has been in effect since 2002. Its official name is Directive 2002/58/EC. This prohibits private electronic communications being intercepted or analysed without consent. Since 2021, however, an exception to the ePrivacy Directive has been in effect that specifically permits this type of monitoring.

Platforms such as Meta, Google, and Microsoft have so far been allowed to voluntarily scan private communications to identify and report instances of child abuse. In 2024, the EU extended this interim measure to allow time for comprehensive, permanent regulations to combat online child abuse. The European Commission had already presented a proposal on this in 2022.

No more extensions! Actually, maybe a short one?

To understand how things got to this point, it’s worth taking a look back. The current measure was never intended to be a permanent solution. A majority of the Parliament initially rejected a further extension. On 11 March 2026, it seemed as though there might at least be another interim solution.

Parliament approved an extension until August 2027 – the so-called «light version of Chat Control.» This version placed greater emphasis on data protection and provided a balance between security and civil liberties. Instead of relying on blanket surveillance, it would opt for a targeted approach.

In concrete terms, this would mean:

1. Focus on known material (hash matching)
2. No blanket mass surveillance
3. Protection of end-to-end encrypted communication
4. Limited use overall

The idea behind this was to ensure child protection without violating fundamental privacy principles. But it was precisely these restrictions that became the crux of the matter in the negotiations that followed. This is because a decision by the Parliament alone isn’t sufficient in the EU. For a law to be enacted, three institutions must reach an agreement: the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and the European Commission.

Following the vote, trilogue negotiations began between these parties. But those talks broke down. While Parliament insisted on a limited version, some member states in the council didn’t think the solution was sufficient. In particular, the restriction to already known material and the protection of encrypted communications were criticised as ineffective. Without an agreement, no law could be implemented. Germany plays a decisive role in trilogue negotiations. This is because winning trilogue negotiations requires the approval of 55 per cent of all EU member states, which together represent 65 per cent of the EU population. Mathematically speaking, a majority without Germany is virtually impossible. However, because opinions are divided within Germany, there was no majority in the Council in favour of either side.

Attempted procedural manoeuvre fails

After the negotiations broke down, the conservative European People’s Party made a final attempt to push through the extension. It resorted to a procedural measure: the referral back to committee. This procedure allows a bill to be sent back to the relevant committee for further deliberation and then brought before the plenary session again at a later date.

The goal? A fresh start for the old Chat Control system – without the privacy-friendly measures of the «light version of Chat Control». But it didn’t even come to a vote. A clear majority in Parliament already rejected the idea of debating the «old» Chat Control system again. In doing so, Parliament prevented a new vote on the extension itself. And the result was clear: 311 votes against, 228 in favour. 92 eligible voters abstained.

Who agrees with this?

The debate shows just how deep the divisions run. On one side were mainly conservative lawmakers, as well as some Social Democrats and Liberals, who supported the extension. Their argument: without the ability to monitor communications, fewer cases would be detected and it would be more difficult to prosecute offenders. Law enforcement agencies and child protection organisations also warned that this would be a step backward.

On the other hand, the Greens, the Left Party, and parts of the Social Democrats and Liberals rejected the measure – even in its watered-down form. They see Chat Control as a massive invasion of all users’ privacy. Critics speak of mass surveillance, warn of false alarms, and fear that measures introduced today will be expanded in the future.

What happens now?

This means that on 4 April, not only will a regulation come to an end, but for the time being, so too will the attempt to reach a compromise in the short term. From this point on, platforms will lack a clear legal basis for voluntarily scanning private communications. A regulatory void is emerging, while a long-term solution (or a complete abandonment of Chat Control) remains difficult to achieve.

Florian Bodoky

Editor

Florian.Bodoky@digitecgalaxus.ch

I've been tinkering with digital networks ever since I found out how to activate both telephone channels on the ISDN card for greater bandwidth. As for the analogue variety, I've been doing that since I learned to talk. Though Winterthur is my adoptive home city, my heart still bleeds red and blue. more

---

Background information

Interesting facts about products, behind-the-scenes looks at manufacturers and deep-dives on interesting people.

Show all

These articles might also interest you