European Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly “deeply regrets” the EU Commission’s refusal to make public four documents related to the drafting of proposed laws on chat control, as per her recommendation. According to O’Reilly, this includes meetings between the Commission and Thorn, a “self-proclaimed” non-governmental organization that “developed and sold tools to uncover child sexual abuse material on the Internet.”
Advertisement
Thorn, co-founded by Hollywood star Ashton Kutcher, is seen as the driving lobby force behind the EU Commission’s controversial draft regulation on online surveillance under the banner of the fight against child sexual exploitation.
O’Reilly still believes it is necessary for the commission to disclose the documents. A tailored transparency According to the Irish woman, this will be importantOnly with the publication of the papers could it be publicly verified whether the Commission had acted independently and in the public interest. O’Reilly criticised the Commission’s view that there was no public interest in disclosure.
The commission is mired in contradictions
Rejecting the freedom of information request, the EU Commission said that Thorn had only provided it with expert knowledge and had not attempted to influence legislative initiatives. This is not true, O’Reilly insists: according to the Commission’s own documents, commercial strategy for the use of Thorn products such as “safe” filters was also an issue. The program is designed to use Microsoft’s PhotoDNA to detect depictions of child sexual abuse by comparing the hash values of images and videos to a database of known recordings.
O’Reilly also criticises the fact that the Commission’s no is based on the protection of commercial interests. Much of the information sought is of a “general nature” or has already been published by Thorn. National authorities have also already partially disclosed the documents under their freedom of information rules. The Commission’s approach is therefore surprising. O’Reilly could now prepare a special report to the EU Parliament to escalate the controversy.
Last year, MPs agreed on extensive improvements to the original chat control draft. Despite repeated efforts, including by the Belgian Council presidency, EU states have not yet been able to agree on a common line in the past six months.
(Mac)
