Source: European Parliament
Priority question for written answer P-003074/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Günther Sidl (S&D)
The DSA came into force in February 2024; it lays down specific obligations for large online platforms to tackle illegal hate speech on the internet.
However, as explained in the blog post ‘X ist ein rechtsfreier Raum’ (‘X is a legal vacuum’) by an Austrian journalist and television presenter, there are considerable doubts as to whether, in practice, the DSA is being implemented in accordance with the law[1]. For example, following a criminal complaint made in order to have a perpetrator of hate speech on X investigated, both Twitter International Unlimited Company in Dublin, which is responsible for processing data for X in the EU, and the Irish Department of Justice refused to comply with a Vienna Regional Criminal Court order to provide information. The Austrian courts have therefore been unable to investigate the perpetrator.
- 1.Does the Commission regard it as permissible for an online platform to refuse to provide information to a Member State’s judicial authority on the ground that only requests under a bilateral mutual legal assistance agreement will be responded to?
- 2.Does the Commission regard it as permissible for a Member State to refuse to provide assistance on the ground that it is competent only if the requested data are physically stored on its territory?
- 3.Will the Commission take this case as an opportunity to look into whether X and the Republic of Ireland have breached their obligations under the DSA?
Submitted: 24.7.2025
- [1] https://www.arminwolf.at/2025/06/28/x-ist-ein-rechtsfreier-raum/