repubblica.it
EU Condemns Illegal Use of Spyware, Vows to Enforce Data Protection Laws
The European Commission strongly condemned the illegal use of the Israeli spyware Graphite by Paragon, citing the violation of data privacy laws and the targeting of journalist Francesco Cancellato; the Commission will utilize all available tools to enforce EU law and ensure compliance with data protection regulations, with further protections coming from the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) in 2025.
- How does EU law address the use of spyware by private entities for national security purposes?
- The Commission's response highlights the EU's commitment to protecting data privacy and journalistic freedom. It emphasizes that EU data protection laws apply to private entities, even when processing data for national security. While limitations are allowed for important public objectives, they are subject to strict conditions and safeguards.
- What is the European Commission's response to the illegal use of spyware against journalists and political opponents?
- The European Commission condemns the illegal use of spyware, like Paragon's Graphite, to access citizens' data, including journalists and political opponents. The Commission will use all available tools to enforce EU law and ensure compliance with data protection regulations. This follows reports that Italian journalist Francesco Cancellato was targeted for over five months.
- What future legal protections are in place to safeguard journalistic freedom and protect confidential sources from surveillance?
- The upcoming application of Article 4(3)(c) of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) on August 8, 2025, will further strengthen the protection of journalistic sources and confidential information. This, along with other EMFA guarantees, will ensure media freedom and independence across the EU, shielding them from interference. The Commission's strong stance underscores its commitment to upholding democratic values and the rule of law.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The response frames the issue primarily through the lens of the EU's legal and regulatory framework. While emphasizing the Commission's commitment to upholding the law and protecting data privacy, it may downplay the severity of the alleged spyware misuse by focusing on the legal processes rather than the human rights implications for the journalists targeted.
Language Bias
The language used is largely formal and neutral, using terms like "inaccettabile" (unacceptable) which, while strong, is appropriate given the context of the alleged illegal activity. However, the repeated emphasis on legal frameworks and processes could subtly frame the issue as primarily a legal problem rather than one with significant ethical and human rights implications.
Bias by Omission
The response focuses heavily on the EU's legal framework and the actions the Commission will take, but lacks concrete details on investigations or actions already undertaken regarding the specific case of Paragon spyware use against journalists. It mentions the upcoming application of Article 4, paragraph 3, letter c) of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) in 2025, but this doesn't address the current situation. The omission of details regarding ongoing investigations or enforcement actions could leave readers with an incomplete understanding of the EU's response to the issue.
False Dichotomy
The response presents a dichotomy between legal allowances for surveillance for national security and the illegality of accessing data without consent. However, it doesn't explore the complexities of situations where national security concerns might be used to justify actions that violate journalistic freedoms or privacy. The response lacks a nuanced discussion of potential conflicts between these competing interests.
Sustainable Development Goals
The use of spyware against journalists and political opponents undermines the rule of law, freedom of expression, and access to information, all crucial aspects of just and peaceful societies. The EU's response highlights the illegality of such actions under EU law and its commitment to using all available tools to ensure the effective application of Union law. The violation of privacy and the potential chilling effect on investigative journalism directly contradict the principles of justice and strong institutions.