Digital Services Act Back in Spotlight

However, this is not the reason why the Digital Services Regulation (Regulation 2022/2065 on the Digital Single Market and amending Directive 2000/31/EC) has once again been the focus of attention in recent days, and not only among lawyers.

‍
On March 10, 2026, the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic completed the first reading of the government's draft law on the digital economy and amending certain related laws. This legislative proposal has the Chamber of Deputies print number 69. In the speeches of the deputies who commented on the proposal, the Digital Services Act was mentioned, explained, and criticized. Words such as censorship, the end of anonymity, and threats to freedom of expression were used, and as a result of the legislative material proceeding to a second reading, there was even a demonstrative announcement of the resignation of a member of parliament.

‍
The bill itself divided lawmakers into two main schools of thought (seemingly regardless of party affiliation). The first group sees the bill as enshrining the possibility for individuals to seek redress in disputes over the existence of their accounts and posts on online platforms. They argue that it gives individuals the opportunity to have their accounts and posts unblocked by platforms, or to defend themselves against the deletion of a post or account by a platform that does so across the board according to set algorithms and where it is currently not really possible to reverse its actions. They therefore see the proposal as strengthening the role of consumers, not restricting freedom of expression. In their view, the adoption of the bill would give the Czech regulatory authority the tools to enforce the rules that "tech giants" are required to comply with.
‍

The second group sees the proposal as a risk of censorship, as the Digital Services Act (DSA) contains terms with unclear legal definitions (mainly "harmful content", "disinformation", and "systemic risk") and no consistent judicial interpretation to date. This group often takes the radical view that the fight against disinformation is just a cover for censorship. It also fears that the institution of the trusted flagger could contribute to censorship, even though reports from such an entity are only to be given priority, and the position itself does not include decision-making powers. Critics also object to the fact that the European Commission can issue a number of implementing regulations based on the DSA, which specify the obligations for platforms, which are then enforced by regulators.

‍
It is certain that the very interesting discussion in the Chamber of Deputies will continue in the second reading, and above all, a number of amendments will be tabled. Members of Parliament agree in particular on the need to protect children from becoming addicted to social networks, to protect consumers in "e-commerce", and to protect intellectual property. They also agree on the need to designate a national supervisory authority, which will be the Czech Telecommunications Office, and that the DSA currently leads to excessive deletion of content that is not illegal, and that posts are not deleted by people but by algorithms.

‍
Points on which MPs have yet to agree include the need for transparency of the algorithms of large online platforms (the keys by which they display information), the scope of the powers of supervisory authorities and the level of sanctions, the setting up of a "trusted flaggers" institution, and the existence of a so-called censorship trap.

‍
It should be added that the parliamentary press also includes among the proposed amendments to "certain related laws" a draft amendment to the Civil Code introducing special provisions for e-commerce, an amendment to the Act on Special Judicial Proceedings, and an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code. The next legislative procedure will certainly offer even more detailed discussion on the topic.

‍Note: This article was localized from the Czech original via AI.