Could this campaign inspire similar efforts to combat oppressive policies, not just in the EU but also in other supposed democracies?
In today’s turbulent global landscape, a positive story can be a refreshing reminder of the power of grassroots activism. The recent developments in the EU offer hope and inspiration for local movements worldwide that resist the encroachment of digital authoritarianism.
On Monday, October 13, the EU Justice and Home Affairs Council was poised to vote on legislation that would have compelled messaging applications to scan every private message, further eroding online privacy. However, just before the vote, a groundswell of public opposition, sparked by an anonymous Danish citizen, led to the proposal being abruptly withdrawn from the agenda.
“Chat Control”
To provide context: a few weeks ago, we reported on the EU’s alarming new initiative to impose stricter controls on online communications in the post titled, “The EU’s Latest Plan to Stifle Online Privacy Is Terrifying.” The EU, under Denmark’s rotating presidency, was advocating for the so-called Regulation to Prevent and Combat Child Sexual Abuse. This regulation, which originated in 2022, fundamentally threatens end-to-end encryption:
Referred to as the “Chat Control” law, this proposal aims to diminish the spread of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) online. While its intentions are noble, the approach undermines vital rights and protections, risking the transformation of the internet into a more centralized and surveilled space.
In its current form, the Chat Control law would mandate the scanning of private messages, including those safeguarded by end-to-end encryption. If passed, messaging apps like WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram would have to examine every message, photo, and video sent by users, even if encrypted, starting in October.
…
The crux of the proposal involves a mechanism called client-side scanning, which Denmark is eager to implement. From Brussels Signal:
With client-side scanning, content is evaluated on a user’s device before encryption. This essentially creates a permanent backdoor, negating the privacy assurances that secure communication provides. It is akin to having the state inspect your letters before they are sealed, subjecting every EU citizen’s private exchanges to automated surveillance. Those from East Germany may find such Stasi-like mechanisms familiar and unwelcome.
Regrettably, instead of seeking milder alternatives, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has doubled down on this significant policy misstep. Currently, 19 EU states support the proposal, with Germany remaining on the fence but likely to be a critical player. If Berlin aligns with the “yes” group, a qualified majority vote—requiring the backing of 15 states representing 65 percent of the EU population—could lead to the law’s approval by mid-October…
Once enacted, the scope could extend beyond CSAM to almost any content, including political dissent. In parallel, Brussels is striving for stringent content moderation under the Digital Services Act.
The drawbacks of this legislation are apparent, underscoring the need for it to be firmly rejected by European nations. Conversely, the benefits remain ambiguous. Last year, Europol noted that sophisticated criminals often exploit secretive, unregulated platforms, and mass scanning would likely fail to target these offenders while imposing heavier burdens on average citizens. Privacy-focused platforms like Signal have even considered withdrawing from the EU market rather than comply.
Fortunately, nine days ago, German officials announced their withdrawal of support for the controversial Chat Control proposal amidst intense public backlash.
“Taboo in a Constitutional State”
“Random chat monitoring must be taboo in a constitutional state,” asserted German Federal Justice Minister Stefanie Hubig in remarks shared on social media by her ministry. “Private communication should never be placed under general suspicion… Germany will not endorse such proposals at the EU level.”
While committed to combating child pornography, Hubig emphasized that “even the gravest crimes do not justify relinquishing basic civil rights.” A touch of irony isn’t lost on regular readers; it was this same government that was recently criticized by UN human rights experts for its “consistent pattern of police violence and suppression of Palestine solidarity activism,” actions that infringe upon fundamental democratic liberties. But I digress…
Germany isn’t the only EU Member State opposing the Chat Control Law; similar sentiments have come from the Netherlands, Poland, Austria, the Czech Republic, Finland, Estonia, and Slovenia. As indicated in the infographic below, several other nations remain undecided, which is why the European Council removed the vote from their agenda on Monday.
We did it: 🇩🇪Germany will OPPOSE Chat Control! 🥳
Thanks everyone for writing to the ministers. 🫶#ChatControl will not get a majority in the EU Council – at least for now. pic.twitter.com/f2qr0mbTuY
— Tuta (@TutaPrivacy) October 7, 2025
The remarkable turnaround was largely due to a one-person grassroots campaign that effectively applied pressure on Europe’s elected officials by capitalizing on the Internet’s unparalleled network effects. According to POLITICO Europe:
A website created by an anonymous Dane over a single weekend in August has become a significant thorn for those pursuing a European bill aimed at curtailing child sexual abuse material online.
This website, named Fight Chat Control, was established by Joachim, a 30-year-old software engineer living in Aalborg, Denmark. He took action after learning about a proposed European Union measure to combat child sexual abuse material—legislation perceived by privacy advocates as a threat to encryption and a pathway to mass surveillance.
The site empowers visitors to easily compile a mass email alerting national government officials, members of the European Parliament, and others about the bill. Since its launch, it has overwhelmed the inboxes of MEPs and caused a stir within Brussels.
Joachim hasn’t disclosed his last name or workplace for privacy reasons, but POLITICO has verified his identity. He clarified that his employer does not share a commercial interest in the legislation and that he singularly funded the website’s expenses.
This one-man campaign has produced remarkable effects, vividly illustrating how digital technologies can be wielded by both governments for invasive surveillance and by citizens to counteract such efforts. Referring back to the article from POLITICO Europe:
Joachim’s mass email campaign is unconventional as a lobbying strategy, distinct from the more traditional tactics often employed in Brussels. Yet, its impact is undeniable.
The Polish government responded directly to the initiative last month, assuring citizens it opposes mass scanning of communications. A Danish petition, driven by the Fight Chat Control campaign, has amassed over 50,000 signatures, making it eligible for discussion in parliament. Irish lawmakers raised questions in parliament in September regarding “Chat Control,” the terminology adopted by its critics and utilized by Joachim.
As of early October, nearly 2.5 million visitors have accessed his website, according to Joachim, with the majority hailing from the EU. Emails sent through the site originate from users’ email clients, so he doesn’t have exact figures on how many have been sent, but he estimates it has triggered several million emails.
It’s likely that for many of these EU citizens, this marked the first occasion they had reached out to their respective MEPs. Digital rights advocate and former Member of the European Parliament Dr. Patrick Breyer (Pirate Party) celebrated the campaign as a significant triumph but cautioned that the struggle is far from over:
“This is a monumental victory for freedom, demonstrating that public protest can effect change! In response to a deluge of calls and emails, the Social Democrats are maintaining their stance, and even conservative leaders are voicing dissent. Without steadfast resistance from citizens, experts, and organizations, EU governments would have rushed this totalitarian mass surveillance law through next week, effectively ending digital privacy. The fact that we stalled it—for now—is a moment worth celebrating.”
Unsurprisingly, this instance of direct democracy has not pleased all EU officials, as reported by POLITICO Europe:
Some recipients have expressed frustration at the campaign. “In terms of dialogue within a democracy, this is not dialogue,” remarked Lena Düpont, a German member of the European People’s Party group and spokesperson on home affairs, about the mass emails.
Joachim’s initiative is obstructing more conventional lobbyists and advocates as well, they argue. Mieke Schuurman, director at child rights organization Eurochild, claimed the group’s messages are no longer reaching policymakers, who “are increasingly responding with automated replies.”
Joachim, who has not paid to promote the website, expressed regret that child rights advocates had received automated responses. However, he views the email surge from his site’s visitors as “a powerful indication that citizens genuinely care about this… I would argue this is as democratic as it gets,” he added.
It is inevitable that EU authorities will regroup and make another attempt to push this legislation through, with the next vote reportedly scheduled for December. As noted by POLITICO Europe, national governments are “trying—at least for the fifth time—to negotiate a compromise”:
According to an EU diplomat, “some member countries are now more hesitant to back Denmark’s proposal, in part due to the campaign.”
Ella Jakubowska, head of policy at the digital rights group EDRi, remarked, “This campaign seems to have elevated the topic significantly in member states where there was previously little public discourse.”
Broader Applications
This situation raises an important question: could Joachim’s Fight Chat Control website serve as a model for future online campaigns combating similar authoritarian measures, not only in the EU but also in other democratic settings around the world?
This isn’t the first occurrence of such grassroots activism. Over a decade ago, powerful local movements in the United States successfully thwarted the passage of SOPA and PIPA, bills threatening free speech and online security. Once more, the internet’s unparalleled reach has emerged as a formidable weapon against governmental overreach.
One place where such a campaign is sorely needed is the UK, where nearly 3 million people have signed a petition urging the Keir Starmer government to refrain from implementing a digital ID system that was never mentioned in the party’s election manifesto. This figure is 30 times the minimum required to spark a debate in the House of Commons.
Even so, Starmer’s administration has pressed on, ignoring public sentiment. In fact, his stance on digital ID has transitioned from a supposed necessity to combat illegal migration—to a tool seemingly intended for a myriad of purposes, including managing access to bank accounts.
Starmer reveals that digital ID will control access to your own personal funds.
Starmergeddon incoming.
Dont say you weren’t warned. pic.twitter.com/OeoJCbkhcJ
— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) October 11, 2025
Starmer’s admiration for India’s Aadhaar—the world’s largest digital identity system—as a model for the UK is troubling, especially given the numerous security breaches it has faced and the extensive coercive measures surrounding implementation. Life without Aadhaar in India has become synonymous with near-total exclusion. Even FT noted in 2021 that “India’s all-encompassing ID system holds warnings for the rest of the world.”
The UK’s digital identity initiative is not yet fully operational, though it is progressing rapidly, and the threat of data breaches has already emerged. It may be time for British MPs to receive a flood of emails from their constituents—because it’s become clear that the window for action is rapidly narrowing.
