In a bold move that has ignited fierce debate across Europe’s digital policy circles, former Member of the European Parliament Patrick Breyer has accused Denmark’s justice minister of resorting to disinformation to push through the controversial “Chat Control 2.0” regulation. Breyer, a prominent digital rights advocate and ex-MEP for the Pirate Party, claims the Danish official is using a “blatant lie” to blackmail EU member states into approving what he describes as a mass surveillance deal. This comes as the EU Council prepares for a pivotal vote, with resistance mounting from several nations.

The heart of the controversy lies in Denmark’s assertion that without mandatory scanning of private messages for child sexual abuse material, voluntary detection efforts by tech platforms would cease entirely. Breyer counters this narrative, pointing out that existing EU rules already allow for voluntary scanning to continue indefinitely, even without the new regulation. In a statement on his website, Breyer labels this tactic as hypocritical, especially given proposed exemptions that would shield police and military communications from the same scrutiny applied to ordinary citizens.

As the EU grapples with balancing child protection against privacy rights, critics argue that Denmark’s push represents a dangerous escalation in surveillance tactics, potentially undermining end-to-end encryption and setting a precedent for broader digital oversight across the bloc.

This isn’t the first time Chat Control has stirred backlash. The proposal, formally known as the Regulation on Child Sexual Abuse Material, seeks to mandate automated scanning of encrypted messages on platforms like WhatsApp and Signal. Over 500 leading cryptographers and scientists from 34 countries recently penned an open letter, published on Patrick Breyer’s site, deeming the plan “technically infeasible” and a threat to democracy. They warn that such measures could introduce backdoors into secure systems, exposing users to hackers and authoritarian overreach.

Breyer’s exposé highlights how Denmark, holding the EU presidency, is leveraging its position to force a deal. He cites internal documents and ministerial statements to argue that the claimed “blackmail” involves misleading claims about the expiration of current voluntary scanning rules. This has drawn support from privacy advocates, with groups like Nextcloud decrying the proposal as a direct assault on democratic principles in a blog post urging public opposition.

With Germany, Luxembourg, and Slovakia reportedly withholding support, a blocking minority appears to be forming against Chat Control, yet the Danish strategy underscores the high-stakes maneuvering in Brussels where misinformation could tip the scales toward unprecedented surveillance powers.

Industry insiders note that the exemptions for law enforcement add a layer of irony, as they would create a two-tier system where officials evade the very monitoring imposed on the public. Breyer, in his detailed critique, draws parallels to past EU surveillance failures, such as the 2021 ePrivacy Derogation that allowed initial message scanning but faced widespread criticism for overreach. As reported in Hacker News discussions, tech experts fear this could erode trust in European digital infrastructure, pushing users toward unregulated alternatives.

The broader implications extend to global tech standards. If passed, Chat Control could force companies like Meta and Apple to redesign their encryption protocols, potentially conflicting with privacy laws in other jurisdictions. Breyer’s call to action emphasizes transparency, urging EU citizens to contact representatives ahead of the vote. Meanwhile, sites like Stop Chat Control are mobilizing campaigns, framing the regulation as an existential threat to private correspondence.

Amid these tensions, the debate reveals fractures in the EU’s approach to tech regulation, where noble intentions like combating child exploitation clash with fundamental rights, leaving policymakers to navigate a minefield of ethical and technical challenges.

As the Council vote looms, possibly as early as October, observers are watching closely. Breyer’s revelations, amplified through outlets like EU Perspectives, underscore the role of whistleblowers in exposing what he calls a “disinformation campaign.” Success for opponents could preserve encryption’s integrity, but failure might usher in an era of normalized mass scanning, reshaping digital freedom in Europe for years to come.