9 ms·

> The accepted solution is to have a constitution that says otherwise And the willingness and ability to enforce it. The current iteration of ChatControl is pu

by _t9ow 1y ago

> The accepted solution is to have a constitution that says otherwise And the willingness and ability to enforce it. The current iteration of ChatControl is pushed by Denmark, which is at present the President of the Council of the European Union. The Danish Constitution itself enshrines the right to privacy of communication [0], but this is not stopping Denmark from wanting to ratify ChatControl anyway. [0]: https://danskelove.dk/grundloven/72 https://danskelove.dk/grundloven/72

raverbashing 1y ago
Yes but unfortunately courts are mostly reactive, not proactive Sometimes there are some mechanisms to block unconstitutional (or other regulation) laws from passing but they're limited Not sure how that would apply at the EU level or even at the Danish level
- reliabilityguy 1y ago
  > Yes but unfortunately courts are mostly reactive, not proactive I think it’s always the case, no? Unless the unconstitutional law is approved, there is nothing to dispute in court.
  - KPGv2 1y ago
    Correct. Imagine the number of challenges in court based on mere rumor of a law.
  - spockz 1y ago
    In the Netherlands we have the “Eerste kamer” (first chamber, also called Senate) that is responsible for verifying that the proposed laws are in accordance with our “constitution”. They are elected of band with the normal government which should ensure that no single party is able to steamroll laws through both chambers.
    - 1718627440 1y ago
      In theory the "Bundespräsident" in Germany is supposed to only ratify laws that are in accordance with the constitution, but I don't think it happens that he refuses to do this.
rapind 1y ago
> but this is not stopping Denmark from wanting to ratify ChatControl anyway. What the TLDR of the motivation behind this? Is it just politicians playing to their base (think of the children) or corporate lobbying. or religion, etc? Seems to me that the negatives of passing something like this are super obvious and dystopian.
- thatguy0900 1y ago
  If I was leading another western nation I would be looking at the right wing takeover of the US government in terror.
  - KPGv2 1y ago
    For sure. Does anyone want Trump to know everything you write? Erdogan if Turkey ever does enter the EU?
- _t9ow 1y ago
  I suspect it's a mix of many Danish politicians' own authoritarian tendencies/ambitions and corporate lobbying, though I have no proof of the latter when it comes to ChatControl specifically. Generally speaking, there is a lot of dark money in Danish politics, and the EU has repeatedly flagged Denmark as a country lacking in transparency with regards to corporate lobbying: https://www.altinget.dk/artikel/eu-kritik-af-danmark-puster-til-debat-om-lobbyister-vi-har-nogle-problemer-der-fortjener-at-blive-diskuteret https://www.altinget.dk/artikel/eu-kritik-af-danmark-puster-... Generally speaking, the Danish government also tends to behave in authoritarian ways. E.g., Denmark has wilfully violated EU regulations on data retention for many, many years. In 2021, a Danish court ruled that the Danish Ministry of Justice could continue its mass surveillance practices even though they were (and still are) illegal under EU law: https://www.information.dk/indland/2021/06/justitsministeriet-vinder-retssag-masseovervaagning-kan-fortsaette-trods-eu-domme https://www.information.dk/indland/2021/06/justitsministerie... Currently Denmark is also trying to leverage its position as the President of the Council of the EU to legalise, on a EU-wide level, the form of data retention that Denmark has been illegally practising: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14680-Impact-assessment-on-retention-of-data-by-service-providers-for-criminal-proceedings-/public-consultation_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...

by _t9ow 1y ago

raverbashing 1y ago

Yes but unfortunately courts are mostly reactive, not proactive Sometimes there are some mechanisms to block unconstitutional (or other regulation) laws from passing but they're limited Not sure how that would apply at the EU level or even at the Danish level

reliabilityguy 1y ago
> Yes but unfortunately courts are mostly reactive, not proactive I think it’s always the case, no? Unless the unconstitutional law is approved, there is nothing to dispute in court.
- KPGv2 1y ago
  Correct. Imagine the number of challenges in court based on mere rumor of a law.
- spockz 1y ago
  In the Netherlands we have the “Eerste kamer” (first chamber, also called Senate) that is responsible for verifying that the proposed laws are in accordance with our “constitution”. They are elected of band with the normal government which should ensure that no single party is able to steamroll laws through both chambers.
  - 1718627440 1y ago
    In theory the "Bundespräsident" in Germany is supposed to only ratify laws that are in accordance with the constitution, but I don't think it happens that he refuses to do this.

rapind 1y ago

> but this is not stopping Denmark from wanting to ratify ChatControl anyway. What the TLDR of the motivation behind this? Is it just politicians playing to their base (think of the children) or corporate lobbying. or religion, etc? Seems to me that the negatives of passing something like this are super obvious and dystopian.

thatguy0900 1y ago
If I was leading another western nation I would be looking at the right wing takeover of the US government in terror.
- KPGv2 1y ago
  For sure. Does anyone want Trump to know everything you write? Erdogan if Turkey ever does enter the EU?
_t9ow 1y ago
I suspect it's a mix of many Danish politicians' own authoritarian tendencies/ambitions and corporate lobbying, though I have no proof of the latter when it comes to ChatControl specifically. Generally speaking, there is a lot of dark money in Danish politics, and the EU has repeatedly flagged Denmark as a country lacking in transparency with regards to corporate lobbying: https://www.altinget.dk/artikel/eu-kritik-af-danmark-puster-til-debat-om-lobbyister-vi-har-nogle-problemer-der-fortjener-at-blive-diskuteret https://www.altinget.dk/artikel/eu-kritik-af-danmark-puster-... Generally speaking, the Danish government also tends to behave in authoritarian ways. E.g., Denmark has wilfully violated EU regulations on data retention for many, many years. In 2021, a Danish court ruled that the Danish Ministry of Justice could continue its mass surveillance practices even though they were (and still are) illegal under EU law: https://www.information.dk/indland/2021/06/justitsministeriet-vinder-retssag-masseovervaagning-kan-fortsaette-trods-eu-domme https://www.information.dk/indland/2021/06/justitsministerie... Currently Denmark is also trying to leverage its position as the President of the Council of the EU to legalise, on a EU-wide level, the form of data retention that Denmark has been illegally practising: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14680-Impact-assessment-on-retention-of-data-by-service-providers-for-criminal-proceedings-/public-consultation_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...