May 28, 2025

This was evident on Monday, May 26, during an expert meeting organized by the Committee on Digitalization. Fifteen members of Parliament attended the meeting, which was also organized by the Committees for Internal Affairs (BIZA), Justice and Security (J&V), and Foreign Affairs, Defense and Development Cooperation (BDO). The discussion was led by Senator Gala Veldhoen (GroenLinks-PvA), chair of the DIGI committee.

Big Tech and the Resilience of the Democratic Rule of Law

In recent years, it has become clear that the rise of large technology companies—often referred to as big tech—has not left the rule of law untouched. Experts Reijer Passchier, Marietje Schaake, and Marleen Stikker pointed out to the members of Parliament the excessive influence and power that American technology companies have gained. Their technology is present everywhere in our lives and influences the digital public debate and elections with guiding algorithms. Technology is intertwined in all sectors of government: from energy management to the cultural sector and communication. The situation is such that we risk losing our strategic autonomy. At the same time, only a very limited number of people have a say in the direction of these technology companies.

Passchier explains that big tech not only has a strong lobby with unprecedented budgets, making regulatory oversight difficult to establish. The lobby is so large that the interests of big tech seem to equate with public interests. Passchier and Schaake also warned that various prerequisites are not in order. If big tech were to switch off, society would suffer immediate consequences. Regulating through legislation proves difficult, despite extensive European rules. Big tech has more financial resources to litigate for years than smaller European companies. Sanctions are often already factored in by tech companies and nowadays also lead to a political backlash against the European Union.

Additionally, the knowledge of the techniques used and access to information from big tech is insufficient. Under the guise of protecting intellectual property, walls have been erected. This makes oversight challenging. Moreover, the United States has been putting pressure on the existing international order since Trump’s re-election.

Resilience

The dependence on big tech and the changing geopolitical situation make it necessary to break existing relationships. Increasing resilience is crucial, according to Stikker. This must happen on three fronts. Society must become more resilient against the digital platforms that pit parts of society against each other. Additionally, technological resilience is important. The infrastructure and technical knowledge must come back into our own hands with less dependence on external parties. Finally, we must be ecologically more resilient. Artificial intelligence and the amounts of data leave a huge ecological footprint. According to Stikker, it is time to switch to technology that respects strategic autonomy. She mentions the Next Generation Internet program and the shaping of the Eurostack: a digital ecosystem within the EU of, among other things, infrastructure, telecom, internet, and AI facilities.

European Alternative

Reducing dependence can be achieved through disentanglement. This is possible by investing in European alternatives. According to Schaake, this requires decisiveness at the political level. Passchier recommended not to choose a European alternative that works in more or less the same way as American big tech, but to invest in multiple smaller companies. Use the purchasing power of the government for this. New regulations are necessary to ensure future oversight is in order.

Digital Interference and the Democratic Rule of Law

Digital technologies can be deliberately used to undermine democratic processes. This hinders a nuanced public debate and thus poses a threat to the functioning of the democratic rule of law. Marije Arentze argued that disinformation works like a virus. It needs a host body and adapts to social or political contexts to infect maximally. The spread decreases once a large enough part of the population has built psychological resistance against it.

Disinformation is increasingly targeted at individuals, just like advertisements. This leads to problems such as undermining climate policy or vaccination policy. It can also lead to political unrest. As an example, Arentze cites the war against Ukraine. Russia uses information as a weapon in this war. It tries to influence our attention and perception with a continuous stream of misleading and manipulative information.

Arentze advised focusing on resilience. Interventions have been developed for this (from regulating tech companies and countering social polarization to fact-checking and promoting media literacy). Additionally, journalism must be strengthened, as it forms a defense line against indifference, and there is a task for the government to protect the public debate against foreign influence.

Cybersecurity

Cybersecurity encompasses all measures taken to protect computer systems, networks, and digital information from unauthorized access, attacks, damage, or theft. The goal is to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of digital data. According to Inge Bryan, Dutch cybersecurity is under threat. The positive aspect is that digital sovereignty is linked to good cybersecurity. It is important, according to Bryan, to realize that the international legal order is crumbling. This means that we cannot rely on a legal order in terms of cybersecurity. We must therefore defend ourselves. This necessity is now greater due to the absence of the United States in the fight against Russian cyberattacks. However, the average Dutch citizen does not notice much of this because our defense is relatively good. Bryan appreciates the resilience of financial institutions.

The solution to fend off cyberattacks is not merely a technical issue. It is an administrative one, where the solution, according to Bryan, is threefold. First, the attack surface, the IT landscape, must be reduced. More and more users are using more and more programs and platforms, which increases vulnerability.

Second, it is important to increase visibility of possible attacks. This can be done through monitoring with technology. Bryan further advises that if it cannot be monitored, it should be turned off. For example, during NATO summits, much ICT can be better turned off preventively. Lastly, we must weaken the attacker. It is known that we are being spied on. Therefore, ensure that criminal IT infrastructure is dismantled.

Finally, Bryan mentions the necessity of sharing information more. She urges members of Parliament to also share the knowledge they gain on this topic in other situations, such as in private settings. Additionally, provide support to employees who are working on this. Support the upcoming plans of the government for digital safety. No additional legislation is needed; the frameworks are there. Unfortunately, the law of the strongest applies, according to Bryan.