In a world where information is often mixed with disinformation, Telegram, the encrypted messaging application, has found itself at the center of an unprecedented controversy. While France claims to have forced the platform to respect the European rules after the arrest of its founder, Pavel Durov returns the accusation: according to him, it was the French authorities who have been slow to apply the procedures provided by the EU. A rhetorical duel that reveals deeper tensions on the control of tech giants.
In short
- Telegram at the heart of a controversy after the arrest of its founder, Pavel Durov, in France.
- Paris is pleased to have forced the platform to comply with Digital Services Act.
- Durov retorte: Telegram was already in line, it was the French authorities who ignored the procedures.
- A case that highlights administrative gaps and tensions around European digital regulation.
Chronology of a misunderstanding: arrest, contradictory procedures and stories
The summer of 2024 will remain marked by the spectacular arrest of Pavel Durov in France. Accused of complicity in infantile operations and drug trafficking – allegations linked to moderation deemed lax on Telegram -, the founder is placed in police custody, then released under judicial supervision. The French media then relay an official version: this arrest would have encouraged Telegram to finally cooperate with European requirements.
But Durov, accustomed to the sliced positions, firmly disputes this story. On X (ex-twitter), he denounces a blatant disinformation. According to him, Telegram scrupulously respects Digital Services Act (DSA) for years, even anticipating its entry into force. “We devote millions of dollars annually to legal compliance, everywhere”he insists. The arrest, he believes, serves as a pretext to hide French shortcomings.
The advanced proof? The hexagonal authorities would have started using the legal channels of the DSA after the incident. “Before August 2024, they were unaware of the official procedures to contact us”explains Durov.
A method yet described publicly on the Telegram site, accessible via a simple Google search. A detail that throws raw light on French administrative practices.
DSA, between regulatory ideal and operational realities
Digital Services Actcornerstone of European digital regulation, requires platforms to collaborate with Member States via strict processes.
Telegram claims to have played the game from the start: dedicated interface for judicial requests, dedicated teams, reinforced transparency. “We are ready for years before legal deadlines”insists Durov.
However, France would have persisted in bypassing these tools. Until 2024, requests for access to user data arrived by email, sometimes without formal mandate – a practice incompatible with the DSA. “After my arrest, French police suddenly discovered the correct procedure”quips the founder. Result ? Courts were finally able to obtain crucial information for criminal investigations.
This about-face questions. Why did a Member State, often perceived as an EU engine, took so long to apply its own rules? Some see it as a logic of power: by demonizing Telegram, France would hide its own bureaucratic latencies. Others evoke an ignorance of the technical mechanisms of the DSA, complex even for initiates.
Digital sovereignty: Who really controls online space?
Beyond the Franco-Telegram clash, this dispute raises a crucial question: in an interconnected world, which holds real authority on globalized platforms? The nation states, despite their laws, struggle to impose their will on actors without fixed physical siege. Telegram, based in Dubai, embodies this geographical fluidity which challenges traditional jurisdictions.
The European response, via DSA, aims to harmonize the rules. But its application remains uneven. France, by accusing Telegram of non-cooperation, tries to assert its leadership. However, the facts reported by Durov suggest a lack of structural preparation. “We cannot demand from companies that they respect laws that the states themselves ignore”sums up an expert in digital law.
This case could create a precedent. If member countries are slow to master the tools provided by the DSA, the platforms will de facto gain normative power. Telegram, by publicly denouncing French errors, overthrows the balance of power: it is now up to the EU to prove its regulatory credibility.
The conflict between Telegram and France is not just a semantic quarrel. It symbolizes the challenges of still stammering digital regulation, where principles come up against operational realities.
Maximize your Cointribne experience with our 'Read to Earn' program! For each article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start accumulating advantages.
