Commission’s failure to answer priority question P-004203/2025 on EU-supported ‘hate speech’ structures and their role in criminalising lawful expression

Priority question for written answer P-004901/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Christine Anderson (ESN)

In its reply to Written Question P-004203/2025[1], the Commission avoided the substance entirely. Instead of addressing whether EU-supported or Digital Services Act (DSA)-related reporting systems contribute to criminal prosecution of lawful speech, it offered generic remarks on DSA neutrality and platform transparency, none of which answered the questions posed.

The Commission also ignored that the complaint against Professor Norbert Bolz came from a state-run reporting office in Hessen, Germany, publicly linked to broader EU-supported efforts against 'hate' and 'disinformation'. The Commission neither acknowledged this connection nor explained how it prevents such mechanisms from becoming instruments of political denunciation or suppression of dissent.

Given this non-response:

• 1.Will the Commission finally confirm whether EU funding (including the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values Programme) or DSA-related cooperation mechanisms have supported national reporting offices such as Hessen gegen Hetze, and whether such bodies are monitored for potential misuse leading to criminal procedures against lawful online speech?
• 2.How does the Commission justify referring to 'freedom of expression safeguards' while refusing to state whether EU-promoted structures facilitate state-driven censorship in Member States?
• 3.In the light of its non-answer, will the Commission now conduct a formal assessment of whether national 'trusted flagger'-type bodies comply with Article 11 of the Charter, and whether their involvement in prosecutions constitutes a breach of EU values?

Submitted: 10.12.2025

• [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-10-2025-004203_EN.html.