And who runs the EU? The MEPs and members of the countries government. It's not like it's a different country imposing their way onto us. Talk/contacts your ministers and MEPs if you want your voice to be represented.

▲

shiandow 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Right, because a commission that keeps bringing legislation to a vote until one of those two vote pools gets a majority, despite the law being against my government's constitution (in strong terms), and me having no way to stop it if all representatives of my country voted against, is totally not the EU imposing its way on my country.

▲

pixelpoet 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I did send hand-written mails to several German representatives, and this is how I was rewarded.

Obviously I'm not expecting that my actions alone are enough to get the outcome I want, but it's difficult not to feel the bite of "if voting changed anything, they would make it illegal." It's just going to be some other paid-for dickface in corporate pockets, every time.

	▲	somenameforme 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		You don't make it illegal, you simply ban who the people are voting for, even retroactively if necessary.

▲

like_any_other 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The problem is the indirection. Only the European Commission can propose legislation [1], so the legislative direction of the EU is entirely determined by them - MEPs can only slow it down.

And citizens don't vote for the Commission directly, meaning there's a lot of backroom dealing in its selection.

[1] Which also covers, I think, the act of repealing prior legislation.

	▲	yohannparis 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		True, but this is the same as with most EU countries government. In France, I can contact my Ministers... but to what avail!

▲

zx10rse 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You can't be serious.

There should't be a discussion at all.

This law proposal is explicitly against the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the allegedly institutions that are supposed to upheld the charter are CJEU, European Commission, FRA, NHRIs, where are they?

▲

yeahforsureman 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I'm pretty sure that if this passes, the EU Court of Justice will eventually find it more or less in violation with EU fundamental rights.

That will take time, though, so I guess they are either hoping that some impossibly secure, reliable and unerring technologies emerge in the meantime, or they are prepared for a forever battle with the Court, coming up with ever new adjustments as soon as previous schemes get struck down[1], meanwhile allowing European law enforcement agencies to keep testing, developing and iterating on whatever client-side scanning or other techno-legal approaches they may come up with. I think this was roughly what they — ie, basically a group of a dozen or two law enforcement reps from different member states agencies and ministries along with like one lonely independent information security expert — said themselves in some working group report as part of some kind of Commission roadmap thing presented by von der Leyen not too long ago.

[1] On the data protection side we've already seen this kind of perpetual movement through the years with respect to different “safeguarding” mechanisms made available to enable transfers of personal data to the US without too much hassle, from Safe Harbor through Privacy Shield to the current Data Privacy Framework.

▲

Aloisius 3 days ago | parent [-]

I've looked at the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and don't see why this would violate it.

Both the right to privacy and the right to protection of personal data have exemptions for government. The right to private communications was modified by the ECHR to give an exemption for prevention of crime/protection of morals/etc.[1] and the right to protection of personal data exempts any legitimate basis laid down by law[2].

[1] https://fra.europa.eu/en/eu-charter/article/7-respect-privat...

[2] https://fra.europa.eu/en/eu-charter/article/8-protection-per...

	▲	zx10rse 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If you don't see it, it doesn't mean that it is not braking it. They themselves even wrote it in the proposal - "Whilst different in nature and generally speaking less intrusive, the newly created power to issue removal orders in respect of known child sexual abuse material certainly also affects fundamental rights, most notably those of the users concerned relating to freedom of expression and information." This proposal is de facto a mass communication surveillance of EU citizens. Exactly as you mentioned every single member state and EU have laws that can for example issues a court order and seize your communication devices if you are braking a law for an investigation, there is no need for EU to have a law that first goes against the very essence of EU, second it also brakes I am pretty sure every single constitution of each different member states. If this law passes you live in a totalitarian state and there is no excuse for that.
	▲	kelnos 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		What's the point, then? The purpose of a document defining people's rights is to help ensure that governments don't trample those rights. If the government has explicit carve-outs to violate those rights, then the Charter isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

▲

yohannparis 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm totally opposed to this law. My comment was about the fact that the EU is imposing their view on EU countries, like we have no say on the matter. I emailed all my MEPs to oppose this proposal.

▲

FpUser 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>"Talk/contacts your ministers and MEPs if you want your voice to be represented."

And be told to sod off.

From Wikipedia: [0]-"Currently, there is one member per member state, but members are bound by their oath of office to represent the general interest of the EU as a whole rather than their home state."

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

▲

Eddy_Viscosity2 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> And who runs the EU?

How difficult is it to run? How much money do you need? What are the barriers to success? Is it set up so that only the already rich and powerful can run and win (and therefore they are just pushing their own interests), and if not do you need considerable financial support (and therefore are beholden to the already rich and powerful who funded your campaign)?

	▲	Jensson 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		There are people with no backing, not even existing parties, that get elected as EU representatives. So its not that difficult to run if you have a platform some people care about. It is much easier to break into EU than the local governments, since EU has so much less power, so you have more weird people there.