Det finns en mall som är enkel att använda samt kontaktuppgifter på fightchatcontrol.eu. Tidigare har det gjort skillnad i frågan när vi, dvs du och jag och flera som vi i EU, har kontaktat parlamentariker och andra.

Ulrika

------- Forwarded Message ------- Från: BREYER Patrick via DFRI-intern dfri-intern@lists.dfri.se Datum: Den tisdag 24 mars 2026 kl. 07:09 Ämne: URGENT CALL TO ACTION: Stop the anti-democratic "Chat Control" re-vote – Expose the Lobby Propaganda! (Votes: Wed 25th & Thu 26th) Till: dfri@dfri.se dfri@dfri.se

Dear friends,

We are facing a democratic emergency regarding the EU CSA Regulation (ePrivacy derogation / Chat Control):

Just weeks ago, the European Parliament bravely adopted a position rejecting indiscriminate chat control mass surveillance of private messages. However, in an obscure and bizarre procedural move, the conservative EPP group in the European Parliament are attempting to force a re-vote to undo this brilliant work.

Why is this happening? Because MEPs are currently buckling under an unprecedented, highly coordinated barrage of lobby propaganda. An unholy alliance of Big Tech, law enforcement agencies, and industry-/government-funded child protection groups has manufactured a false panic to force mass surveillance through the back door.

We have just hours to counter this massive lobbying effort. The Parliament will vote twice this week: tomorrow (25th) and Thursday (26th).

🗣️ THE CORE MESSAGE TO MEPs

The legislative process is intentionally confusing right now. Give MEPs these exact, simple voting instructions:

• VOTE 1 - Wednesday (25th): VOTE IN FAVOR of motion to remove the vote from the agenda. This motion dictates that the Parliament should not vote again on the ePrivacy derogation. The Parliament has already agreed on a democratic position earlier this month. Reopening it makes a mockery of the democratic process.
• VOTE 2 - Thursday (26th): If Wednesday's motion fails, DEFEND PRIVACY. MEPs must maintain their original stance: scanning measures must be fully targeted (amendment 35).

WHAT YOU CAN DO RIGHT NOW

• Contact MEPs: Tell them to respect the Parliament’s original [11 March position](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-10-2026-0070_EN.html). Use and share the tool fightchatcontrol.eu to easily find MEP email addresses.
• Generate Media Attention: Issue press releases, contact tech/political journalists, and explicitly expose this attempt to undermine a democratic vote through corporate and police lobbying.
• Use Direct Channels: If you or your organization have direct, personal contacts with MEPs or their staff, call or message them.

📢 AMPLIFY ON SOCIAL MEDIA: REPOST & SHARE

To cut through the lobby noise, we need massive public visibility. Please repost, share, and raise awareness on your social media channels today.

⚡ QUICK SHARE: Please immediately repost these urgent alerts on your channels:

• 🐦 X (Twitter): [Share this Post](https://x.com/echo_pbreyer/status/2035296556857839956)
• 🦋 Bluesky: [Share the Alert](https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:qy2on5whae2qztxkx2jpzgkk/post/3mhkrrajyoyd2)
• 🐘 Mastodon: [Boost the call for action](https://digitalcourage.social/@echo_pbreyer/116266597665909346)

When drafting your own posts:

• Direct citizens to action: Share the link fightchatcontrol.eu so the public can directly and easily email their MEPs.
• Boost the counter-narrative: Share the facts exposing the lobby network. A great starting point is [this expose thread](https://digitalcourage.social/@echo_pbreyer/116205371224315359).

⚠️ KNOW YOUR ENEMY: EXPOSING THE LOBBY PROPAGANDA

To effectively counter their narrative, you must know what MEPs are being fed. Here is the propaganda currently flooding MEPs. Use these links in your press releases and social media to expose their coordinated panic-mongering:

• Big Tech & Industry:

• Google: Pushing for derogation to avoid privacy compliance: [Google Policy Blog](https://blog.google/company-news/outreach-and-initiatives/public-policy/eu-l...)

• DOTEurope: Directly supporting the EPP's push for surveillance: [LinkedIn Post 1](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/doteurope_policymakers-across-the-political-s...) | [LinkedIn Post 2](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/doteurope_it-might-sound-unbelievable-but-the...)

• Law Enforcement: Police unions and agencies are pushing authoritarian framing.

• BKA President: [Warning in Die Zeit](https://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zeitgeschehen/2026-03/bka-sexueller-missbra...)

• Police Union (GdP): [Press Statement](https://www.gdp.de/bund/de/stories/2026/03/polizei-muss-befaehigt-werden-gdp...)

• Industry-Funded NGOs:

• IWF: [Statement claiming "children at risk"](https://www.iwf.org.uk/news-media/statements/eu-failure-on-temporary-derogat...)

• ECLAG: [Reaction to Trialogue breakdown](https://childsafetyineurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/ECLAG-Reaction-to...)

🛡️ AMMUNITION: DEBUNKING THEIR LIES

• The "Blame Game" Lie: EU governments are publicly blaming the Parliament for negotiations falling apart. This is false. [This recent report from Netzpolitik](https://netzpolitik.org/2026/verlaengerung-der-ausnahmeregelung-rat-liess-ch...) proves the Council knowingly and deliberately let negotiations fail because they refused to compromise.
• The "Tech is Safe" Lie: Proponents claim their scanning tools are precise. Point to [this brand-new study from KU Leuven scientists](https://www.esat.kuleuven.be/cosic/pseudodna/) exposing the severe "structural weaknesses" and flaws in PhotoDNA’s CSAM scanning.

📎 OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS FOR REFERENCE

For your policy teams, here are the official links regarding Thursday's agenda and voting:

• Agenda for Thursday: [Link](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/OJQ-10-2026-03-26_EN.html#V-29)
• Voting List: [Link](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sedcms/votingList/(A10-0040_2026)_Sippel.pdf)
• Amendments (29-36) to be voted on: [Link](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-10-2026-0040_EN.html)

Please help now. Let's not let Big Tech and mass-surveillance advocates perpetuate Chat Control the phasing out of which is within reach.

Best regards,

Patrick

My latest press release:

The Battle Over Chat Control: How EU Governments and the Tech Lobby Are Trying to Overturn Parliament's Vote — A Comprehensive Fact Check

This week, the European Parliament faces a decisive vote on whether the indiscriminate scanning of private chats and emails by US tech companies (Chat Control 1.0) will be allowed to continue. After Parliament [voted](https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/historic-chat-control-vote-in-the-eu-parlia...) on 11 March to replace blanket mass surveillance with targeted monitoring of suspects — thereby protecting the confidentiality of digital correspondence — EU member state governments let the trilogue negotiations fail by refusing to compromise in substance.

Now, in an unprecedented manoeuvre, the conservative EPP group is attempting to force a [repeat vote](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/OJQ-10-2026-03-26_EN.html#V-29) on Thursday (26 March) to overturn the Parliament's principled decision and keep indiscriminate chat scanning in place. A preliminary vote on Wednesday will determine whether this repeat vote goes ahead or is struck from the agenda.

Digital rights expert and former MEP Patrick Breyer outlines the urgently needed change of strategy:

...

"Indiscriminate Chat Control is like trying to mop up water while the faucet is still running. It is technologically obsolete and a proven failure in criminal justice terms. Flooding our police forces each year with hundreds of thousands of hits from unreliable US algorithms — most of them either false positives or long-known duplicates — does not rescue a single child from ongoing abuse. This data deluge ties up massive resources that are desperately needed for undercover investigations into actual abuse networks. To genuinely protect children online, we need a paradigm shift: providers must be required to prevent cybergrooming through safe app design and strict default settings. Illegal material on the open internet and darknet must be proactively tracked down and removed at source. That is what truly protects children."

---

Background: What exactly expires on 3 April

An EU interim regulation (2021/1232), set to expire on 3 April, currently permits US corporations such as Meta to carry out indiscriminate mass scanning of private messages on a voluntary basis. Three types of chat control are authorised: scanning for already known images and videos (so-called hash scanning, which generates over 90% of reports); automated assessment of previously unknown images and videos; and automated analysis of text content in private chats.

The AI-based analysis of unknown images and texts is extremely error-prone. But the indiscriminate mass scanning for known material — [proposed by socialists and liberals](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-10-2026-0040-AM-030-031_EN.p...) — is highly controversial, too: beyond the [unreliability of the algorithms documented by researchers](https://eprint.iacr.org/2026/486), these scans rely on opaque foreign databases rather than European criminal law. The algorithms are blind to context and lack of criminal intent (e.g. consensual sexting between teenagers). As a result, vast numbers of private but criminally irrelevant chats are exposed.

In the run-up to the vote, US tech corporations, foreign-funded lobby groups, and law enforcement agencies are flooding public discourse with warnings about an alleged "legal gap." A comparison of their claims with internal documents, scientific studies, and the voices of child protection experts and actual abuse survivors, however, reveals an entirely different picture.

---

Disinformation Narratives of Chat Control Proponents — and the Facts

Disinformation 1: "The European Parliament is to blame for the collapse of negotiations and is putting children at risk." (Claimed by the [lobby alliance ECLAG](https://childsafetyineurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/ECLAG-Reaction-to...) and [US tech companies](https://blog.google/company-news/outreach-and-initiatives/public-policy/eu-l...))

• Fact: It was the EU Council of Ministers that deliberately let the trilogue negotiations fail, for tactical reasons.
• Evidence: [Leaked Council cables, classified as restricted](https://netzpolitik.org/2026/verlaengerung-der-ausnahmeregelung-rat-liess-ch...), reveal that EU member states showed no willingness to compromise, fearing that any concession could set a precedent for the permanent Chat Control 2.0 regulation. The classified minutes from 13 March show that the Cypriot Presidency already anticipated failure before the final trilogue round, noting it did "not expect to reach an agreement" with the lack of a new mandate given by member states. A majority including Hungary, Belgium, Sweden, Spain, Latvia, Slovakia, Malta, Estonia, Slovenia, Romania and Germany were unwilling to make any concessions on scope. Only a small minority of governments including France and Ireland agreed to the Presidency's proposal to phase out at least the most error-prone text scanning in search of "grooming". The Netherlands showed itself "completely flexible", and Italy had long before [criticised](https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-5792-2026-ADD-1/en/pdf) the scope of scans and demanded "prior authorization of detection activities by [public] authorities".
• Parliament's lead negotiator, Birgit Sippel (S&D), [sharply criticised the Council](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20260316IPR38230/child-sex...) after the breakdown: "with their lack of flexibility, Member States have deliberately accepted that the interim regulation will expire in April."

Disinformation 2: "Without indiscriminate Chat Control, law enforcement will be flying blind." (Claimed by law enforcement officials across the EU)

• Fact: Targeted telecommunications surveillance based on concrete suspicion and a judicial warrant remains fully available after 3 April, as does the bulk scanning of public posts and hosted files. User reports also remain possible. The real problem for authorities is a flood of false leads and a systemic refusal to remove material from the internet.
• Evidence — investigative chaos: According to Germany's Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA), nearly 50% of chat control reports are criminally irrelevant. This flood of data waste ties up massive resources desperately needed for targeted, undercover investigations into real abuse networks. Where investigations are opened, German crime statistics show that around 40% of suspects are minors themselves, often acting without criminal intent or in consensual situations. The [Federation of German Criminal Investigators (BDK) warns](https://www.bdk.de/der-bdk/was-wir-tun/aktuelles/keine-massenueberwachung-un...) that this mass surveillance produces "a flood of tips… often without any actual investigative lead." Meanwhile, Europol and German authorities systematically refuse to proactively have abuse material removed from the internet, as [investigative reporting by ARD/STRG_F has revealed](https://www.tagesschau.de/investigativ/ndr/innenminister-darstellung-sexuali...) — images and videos remain online despite authorities being fully able to have them taken down, even as they demand ever more surveillance powers.
• Evidence — failure to protect children: Mass scanning for already known images does not stop ongoing abuse and does not rescue children in acute danger. According to the European Commission's own [evaluation report](https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/chat-control-evaluation-report-eu-commissio...), no measurable link can be established between the mass surveillance of private messages and actual convictions. Yet the Commission and Council demand the extension of a measure whose effectiveness they themselves cannot demonstrate.
• Evidence — risk of annulment in court: The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) [stresses](https://www.edps.europa.eu/press-publications/press-news/press-releases/2026...) that any solution used to detect illegal content must be targeted and not indiscriminate. The Council's own legal service [concluded](https://www.patrick-breyer.de/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/st08787.en23-leak.p...) in 2023 concerning the proposal for a permanent regulation (CSAR): "the detection order regime provided for by the proposed Regulation as regards interpersonal communications entails a serious risk that it would be found to compromise the essence of the rights to privacy and data protection enshrined in Article 7 and 8 of the Charter, in so far as it would seek to authorise access on a generalised basis, through automated and systemic screening surveillance, to the content of electronic communications and personal data of all users of a specific service, irrespective of their direct or indirect link with child sexual abuse criminal activities" (para 58)

Disinformation 3: "The scanning technology deployed is highly precise and protects privacy." (Claimed by [Meta, Google, Microsoft, Snap, TikTok](https://blog.google/company-news/outreach-and-initiatives/public-policy/eu-l...))

• Fact: The technology is an ineffective legacy system, error-prone, and destructive to the security of private communications.
• Evidence — an obsolete model: Offenders can effortlessly switch to secure messengers where no chat control takes place. Due to the increasing adoption of end-to-end encryption by providers, the number of chats reported to police has already dropped by 50% since 2022. Most recently, only [36%](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0740) of reports from US companies originated from the chat control of private messages, while social media platforms and cloud storage services are becoming increasingly relevant. Rather than investing in targeted investigative work, the Council clings to a dying surveillance model.
• Evidence — unreliability: A [recent international research paper](https://eprint.iacr.org/2026/486) documents the structural weaknesses of the industry standard PhotoDNA. The software is unreliable: criminals can make illegal images invisible through minimal alterations (e.g. adding a border), while innocent citizens can easily be falsely flagged. In a [November 2025 open letter, leading IT researchers](https://csa-scientist-open-letter.org/Nov2025) (including from the universities of Aarhus, Leuven, and ETH Zurich) warned: "False positives seem unavoidable." According to an [open letter by a coalition of more than 40 civil liberties organisations and professional associations](https://edri.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/We-say-no-to-Big-Tech-mass-snoop...) (including Europe's leading digital rights groups), the Commission's own evaluation report confirms the measure's failure: the US algorithms deployed show error rates of 13 to 20 percent. Of the billions of messages scanned, only 0.0000027 percent were actually illegal material.

Disinformation 4: "The call for Chat Control comes primarily from victims and civil society." (Suggested by the [ECLAG campaign](https://childsafetyineurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/ECLAG-Reaction-to...))

• Fact: Actual survivors are taking legal action against Chat Control. The real driving force behind the campaign is a network of tech companies and lobby organisations funded by governments and non-European foundations.
• Evidence — survivors speak out: Survivors of sexualised violence are fighting back. Alexander Hanff, a survivor and privacy advocate, [writes](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-i-dont-support-privacy-invasive-measures-...): "As a survivor, I depend on confidential communication to find support and report crimes. Taking away our right to privacy means further harming us." Dorothée Hahne of the [survivors' association MOGIS e.V. warns](https://mogis-verein.de/static/media/uploads/eu_efa-greens-speech-mogis-hahn...): "We see our safe spaces destroyed." To preserve safe spaces for victims, [a survivor from Bavaria is currently suing](https://freiheitsrechte.org/en/themen/freiheit-im-digitalen-zeitalter/chatco...) with the support of the Society for Civil Rights (GFF) against Meta's scanning of his chats. The civil society coalition also [warns](https://edri.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/We-say-no-to-Big-Tech-mass-snoop...) that indiscriminate scanning dangerously undermines professional confidentiality for lawyers, doctors, and therapists.
• Evidence — lobbying: Who truly benefits from this legislation was exposed in an [investigative report by Balkan Insight](https://balkaninsight.com/2023/09/25/who-benefits-inside-the-eus-fight-over-...). The US organisation Thorn, which sells scanning software to public authorities, invests hundreds of thousands of euros annually in EU lobbying. ECLAG members [are supported](https://digitalcourage.social/@echo_pbreyer/116205371224315359) by tech corporations and the non-European Oak Foundation.

---

The Alternative to Surveillance Overreach: "Security by Design"

The European Parliament [advocates](https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/chat-control/#epmandate) a genuine paradigm shift, supported by civil society, survivor networks, and IT security experts: instead of indiscriminate mass surveillance of private communications using error-prone US algorithms, chat and messaging services should be "Secure by Design." This includes:

• Strict default settings and protective mechanisms (Security by Design) to make cybergrooming technically harder from the outset and prevent the creation of CSAM.
• Targeted telecommunications surveillance based on judicially confirmed suspicion.
• Proactive search by a new EU Center and immediate takedown obligations for providers and law enforcement on the open internet and darknet — removing illegal material at source.

---

Call to Action

Civil liberties advocates are urging citizens across Europe to contact their MEPs directly ahead of the decisive votes on Wednesday and Thursday. Through the campaign page fightchatcontrol.eu, MEPs can be called upon to reject the undemocratic motion for a repeat vote and to uphold the fundamental right to confidential correspondence.

Breyer warns:

...

"When a democratic decision is put to a vote repeatedly until the desired outcome is achieved, Parliament itself is devalued. This approach sets a dangerous precedent. It undermines the reliability of democratic processes and sends the signal that majorities only count when they are politically convenient. The responsible actors are damaging not only trust in the European institutions, but the very foundations of democracy."

On Tuesday, EU governments [will strategise](https://www.parlament.gv.at/dokument/XXVIII/EU/64047/imfname_11593678.pdf) in a restricted format and behind closed doors on the issue.

...

---