EU Proposal on Private Message Scanning: A Conflict Between Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A European Commission proposal, known as “chat control,” is currently under debate within the European Council. The regulation aims to scan private digital communications to detect and report Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM). This initiative places the European Union at a critical juncture, highlighting a direct conflict between key targets within the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), primarily the protection of children (SDG 16.2) versus the protection of fundamental freedoms and secure digital infrastructure (SDG 16.10 and SDG 9).

Alignment with SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The proposal’s primary justification is its strong alignment with SDG Target 16.2, which calls for an end to abuse, exploitation, and all forms of violence against children.

• Objective: To combat the proliferation of CSAM by implementing on-device AI scanning of photos and links within messaging applications.
• Justification: The European Commission’s initial proposal noted that over half of children experience some form of online sexual abuse, underscoring the urgency of achieving SDG 16.2.
• Institutional Framework: The plan includes the establishment of a new EU agency to manage a database of known CSAM, contributing to the development of effective and accountable institutions as per SDG Target 16.6.

Challenges to Fundamental Freedoms and Digital Infrastructure (SDG 16 & SDG 9)

Opposition to the regulation is rooted in its potential to undermine other critical SDG commitments, particularly those related to fundamental rights and secure infrastructure.

1. Violation of Fundamental Freedoms (SDG 16.10): Privacy advocates argue that the proposal fundamentally compromises the right to privacy, a key freedom protected under SDG Target 16.10. Bypassing end-to-end encryption, a technology that guarantees secure and private communication, is seen as a disproportionate measure. A petition against the regulation has garnered significant public support.
2. Impact on Secure Infrastructure (SDG 9): End-to-end encryption is a cornerstone of secure and resilient digital infrastructure (SDG Target 9.1). Mandating a system that weakens or bypasses this security standard could create vulnerabilities, eroding trust in digital communication platforms essential for economic and social well-being.

Member State Deliberations and Political Status

The debate reflects differing national priorities in balancing these competing SDG targets. The current political positions within the European Council are as follows:

• In Favour: Denmark, holding the rotating presidency of the Council, is strongly advocating for the proposal and aims to bring it to a ministerial vote within a month.
• Opposed: Germany has formally indicated its opposition, prioritizing privacy and digital security concerns.
• Undecided: France, previously in favour, is now reported to be reconsidering its position following a change in government.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

   SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • The article discusses a proposed European Union law (“chat control”) aimed at combating child sexual abuse online. This directly relates to SDG 16, which focuses on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, providing access to justice for all, and building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions. The effort to create a new EU agency and a legislative framework to protect children from violence and abuse is a core component of building stronger institutions and ensuring justice. The debate also touches on fundamental freedoms (privacy), another key aspect of this goal.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

   Target 16.2: End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children.

   • This target is directly addressed by the European Commission’s proposal. The article states the plan’s purpose is to “tackle the scourge of child sexual abuse material” and cites that “more than half of children experience a form of sexual abuse online.” The entire “chat control” initiative is a mechanism designed to achieve this specific target by detecting and reporting illegal content to protect children.

   Target 16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.

   • This target is relevant due to the conflict between the proposed security measure and individual rights. The article highlights that “privacy activists are up in arms” because the law would mean “bypassing end-to-end encryption, which currently guarantees security and privacy.” This debate engages directly with the challenge of protecting fundamental freedoms (like the right to privacy) while implementing security legislation.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

   Implied Indicator for Target 16.2

   • The article mentions the statistic used by the European Commission: “more than half of children experience a form of sexual abuse online.” This figure serves as a baseline indicator of the problem’s magnitude. Progress towards Target 16.2 could be measured by a reduction in this percentage over time following the implementation of policies like the one proposed. It reflects the prevalence of online sexual violence against children, which is a key component of this target.

   Implied Indicator for Target 16.10

   • The article notes that a “petition against the regulation has been signed 30,000 times.” This can be seen as an implied indicator for measuring public sentiment and engagement regarding the protection of fundamental freedoms. It quantifies the level of public concern about the potential impact of the proposed law on privacy rights, which are a core element of Target 16.10.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article. In this table, list the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), their corresponding targets, and the specific indicators identified in the article.

   SDGs	Targets	Indicators
   SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	16.2: End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children.	The statistic that “more than half of children experience a form of sexual abuse online” is an implied indicator of the prevalence of the problem the policy aims to address.
   SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.	The petition against the regulation with 30,000 signatures serves as an implied indicator of public concern regarding the protection of fundamental freedoms like privacy.

Source: france24.com