Overview
This report provides an analysis of Parliamentary Questions (PQs) and European Commission replies published from 30.03.2026 to 05.04.2026. The key policy areas under scrutiny include the enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Markets Act (DMA), the application of the GDPR to AI development, cybersecurity in connected vehicles, and institutional transparency. In its responses, the Commission consistently positions itself as a diligent enforcer of existing legal frameworks, often deferring to national authorities for case-specific implementation and defending its procedures against external criticism. These developments are critical for digital policy professionals as they signal a shift from legislative creation to the complex, real-world implementation and enforcement of the EU’s flagship digital rulebooks.
Digital Services Act (DSA) & Platform Accountability
❗ Commission Defends DSA Against U.S. Allegations of Censorship
In a response on 31 March 2026, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen firmly rejected allegations from the U.S. House Judiciary Committee as ‘unsubstantiated and unfounded’. The Commission’s reply to question E-000458/2026 asserts that the DSA enhances transparency and accountability, clarifying that it does not define illegal content but relies on national or other EU laws. It also stressed the voluntary nature of its guidelines and codes of conduct, and that the ‘trusted flagger’ system, managed by independent national Digital Services Coordinators, is subject to strict safeguards and does not issue legally binding removal orders.
❗ Commission Clarifies Stance on Political Advertising Under DSA
The Commission reiterated that the Political Advertising Regulation does not ban political advertising, nor does it compel online platforms to do so. In his answer of 27 March 2026 to question E-000158/2026, Commissioner McGrath explained that Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) must assess systemic risks related to electoral processes on a case-by-case basis. He also confirmed that the mandatory advertising repositories under Article 39 of the DSA are a legal requirement, separate from any previous voluntary initiatives by platforms.
❗ DSA and Consumer Protection Rules Apply to Online Marketplaces
Responding to a query about the online marketplace Vinted, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen outlined on 30 March 2026 how existing EU laws tackle misleading practices and counterfeit goods. The answer to E-000292/2026 clarifies that while the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) applies to business-to-consumer transactions, the DSA requires platforms like Vinted to implement notice-and-action mechanisms, handle complaints, and act against repeat offenders. Enforcement for non-VLOPs, such as Vinted, falls under the competence of the Member State of establishment, in this case, Lithuania.
❗ Commission Confirms Digital Fairness Act Will Complement DSA on Minor Protection
Commissioner McGrath, in a reply dated 31 March 2026, stated that the upcoming Digital Fairness Act (DFA) will address consumer protection gaps online, with a specific focus on minors, in full complementarity with existing laws like the DSA. The answer to E-004987/2025 highlights that enforcement of the DSA’s Article 28 on the protection of minors is a key priority, with the Commission using its guidelines as a benchmark for VLOP compliance. The Commission also noted its support for the European video games sector through programmes like Creative Europe and MediaInvest.
❓ MEPs Probe Use of DSA Rapid Response System for Hungarian Election
In a priority question (P-001161/2026) submitted on 19 March 2026, MEPs from the PfE group asked the Commission for details on the activation of the DSA’s rapid response system (RRS) ahead of the Hungarian election. They seek to know which NGOs and fact-checkers are participating and whether lists of flagged content will be made public. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ MEPs Question Commission Guidance on ‘Borderline Content’ Moderation
MEPs from several political groups submitted a question (E-001160/2026) on 19 March 2026 concerning a handbook on ‘borderline content’ promoted at the EU Internet Forum. Citing documents from a US House Judiciary Committee report, they question the legal basis for classifying lawful speech such as ‘populist rhetoric’ and ‘anti-EU content’ as problematic categories for platform monitoring. A Commission answer is awaited.
Digital Markets Act (DMA) Enforcement
❗ Commission Monitoring Google’s Android Developer Verification Under DMA
Executive Vice-President Ribera confirmed on 1 April 2026 that the Commission is aware of Google’s plan to require verified developers for all apps on certified Android devices. In response to E-000612/2026, the Commission stated it cannot yet take a view on whether this practice breaches competition law but is actively monitoring Alphabet’s compliance with DMA Article 6(4), which obliges gatekeepers to allow third-party app distribution. The Commission acknowledged that the DMA permits gatekeepers to take ‘strictly necessary and proportionate measures’ to protect system integrity, provided they are duly justified.
❓ MEPs Scrutinise Timeliness and Effectiveness of DMA Enforcement
The Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection has tabled an oral question (O-000016/2026) asking the Commission to assess the real-world outcomes of DMA enforcement beyond formal compliance. Submitted on 27 March 2026, the question probes the lengthy duration of investigations, the application of the DMA to AI and cloud services to prevent new forms of gatekeeping, and whether the Commission has sufficient resources for effective enforcement. A response is pending.
Data Protection & Governance
❗ Commission Affirms GDPR Applies to AI, Defers Enforcement to National Authorities
In a reply dated 1 April 2026, Commissioner McGrath confirmed that any processing of personal data for AI development must comply with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), including rules on lawful grounds for processing and international data transfers. The answer to question P-000903/2026 specifies that enforcement in individual cases lies with national data protection authorities and courts. The Commission also noted its proposed targeted amendments to the GDPR aim to enhance legal clarity and consistent application.
❓ MEPs Ask if GDPR Can Block Parliamentary Access to Public Fund Donor Information
A question (E-000416/2026) submitted on 2 February 2026 by Sandro Gozi (Renew) asks for the Commission’s position on a national executive authority citing GDPR to refuse a national parliament access to a list of public fund donors. The query raises the issue of whether GDPR takes precedence over national constitutional principles of parliamentary oversight and democratic accountability, particularly when most donors are legal persons. A Commission response is pending.
❗ Commission Addresses Cybersecurity and Data Risks in Connected Vehicles
Executive Vice-President Virkkunen, in a reply on 31 March 2026, acknowledged the espionage and physical security risks associated with connected vehicles, as identified by a NIS Cooperation Group assessment. The answer to E-000299/2026 highlights that data access is governed by the GDPR and the ePrivacy Directive. The Commission also pointed to its proposal for a revised Cybersecurity Act to de-risk critical infrastructure from high-risk suppliers and noted that vehicle type-approval rules already require manufacturers to manage cybersecurity risks.
❗ Commission Follows Up on Athens Air Traffic Control System Failure
Following a major technical disruption in the Athens Flight Information Region (FIR) on 4 January 2026, the Commission stated it is closely engaging with Greek authorities. In his answer of 30 March 2026 to question E-000179/2026, Commissioner Tzitzikostas noted that the incident underlines the urgency for Greece to modernise its air traffic management system. The Commission has opened three infringement procedures against Greece for non-compliance with EU law on ATM capabilities and will follow up on the safety investigation findings.
❓ MEPs Raise Alarm Over Rising Memory Component Costs and Chips Act
MEPs have questioned the Commission (E-001238/2026) on the sharp price increases for memory components (DRAM/HBM) driven by AI demand, flagging risks for consumer device prices and EU AI infrastructure deployment. The question, submitted on 25 March 2026, asks how the Commission is monitoring the situation and whether it will use the EU Chips Act’s early warning indicators or consider activating its ‘crisis stage’ provisions. A response is awaited.
❓ MEPs Question European Competitiveness Fund and Digital Wallet Privacy
In a question submitted on 25 March 2026 (E-001241/2026), an MEP from the PfE group challenges the premise of the proposed European Competitiveness Fund, questioning its effectiveness. The query specifically asks the Commission to guarantee that the planned ‘digital wallet’ will not be used for monitoring personal, health, and financial data. The Commission has yet to respond.
❓ MEPs Flag Delays in Construction Products Regulation Implementation
A question (E-001171/2026) from Christian Doleschal (PPE) on 20 March 2026 highlights that the development of new European Assessment Documents (EADs) for innovative construction products has been delayed since the new Construction Products Regulation entered into force. The MEP asks the Commission about missing implementing provisions and what transitional measures are being considered to prevent a regulatory gap that could harm innovation. A response is pending.
❓ MEPs Highlight Regulatory Barriers to Circular Economy for Vehicles
Katri Kulmuni (Renew) submitted a question (E-001269/2026) on 26 March 2026 regarding how current regulations may hamper the reuse of vehicle parts. The query notes that programmed components, battery recycling targets, and a lack of access to manufacturer data for independent dismantlers create barriers to a circular economy, and asks the Commission if it intends to amend the relevant legislation. A response is awaited.
❓ MEPs Question Safety of Mandatory Lane-Keeping Assistance Systems
A question (E-001231/2026) tabled on 24 March 2026 by Merja Kyllönen (The Left) raises safety concerns about the automatic activation of lane-keeping assistance in vehicles, especially in winter conditions. The MEP asks if the Commission is considering adapting the rules to allow drivers to permanently disable the system and how it will ensure automatic safety systems are effective in all conditions. The Commission’s answer is pending.
❓ MEPs Propose Using Digital Tachograph Data for ‘Smart Payslip’
Mario Furore (The Left) asked the Commission on 24 March 2026 (E-001232/2026) about a ‘legal asymmetry’ where certified data from digital tachographs is used for imposing penalties on drivers but not systematically for verifying their wage entitlements. The question proposes the idea of a ‘smart payslip’ and asks what measures the Commission will take to combat wage dumping in the road haulage sector. A response is pending.
❗ Commission Affirms Commitment to Monitoring Media Freedom in Moldova
In a reply on 1 April 2026, Commissioner Kos reiterated the EU’s support for independent media and journalists, noting that guaranteeing media freedom is a fundamental requirement for EU candidate countries. The answer to E-005001/2025 confirms that the Commission will continue to monitor freedom of expression in Moldova, both in terms of alignment with the EU acquis and providing adequate protection for journalists against intimidation and attacks.
Institutional Transparency & Security Strategy
❗ Commission Defends Record-Keeping Policy on ‘Disappearing Messages’
Responding on 30 March 2026 to concerns about the Commission President’s use of disappearing messages, Vice-President Šefčovič outlined the institution’s record-keeping policy. The answer to E-003738/2025 states that any content constituting ‘important information that is not short-lived’ must be registered, regardless of the medium. It clarifies that text messaging apps should not be used for such information unless strictly required, and that it is the professional duty of all staff to follow these rules.
❗ Commission Asserts Full Compliance with Transparency Rules
In a related answer on 31 March 2026, President von der Leyen stated that the Commission acts in accordance with EU transparency rules, including Regulation 1049/2001. The reply to E-004250/2025 references a General Court judgment (T-36/23), noting that while the Court found the Commission should have provided a more detailed explanation for not holding certain text messages, it did not question the Commission’s overall policy. The Commission considers itself in ‘full compliance with the rule of law’.
❓ MEPs Raise Fundamental Rights Concerns Over ‘ProtectEU’ Security Strategy
A group of MEPs submitted a question (E-001208/2026) on 23 March 2026 expressing concerns that the Commission’s ‘ProtectEU’ internal security strategy could infringe on fundamental rights. They ask what legal safeguards will prevent measures from encroaching on lawful political dissent, freedom of expression, and assembly. A Commission response is pending.
❓ MEPs Question Centralisation of Security Powers in Anti-Terrorism Package
In a question submitted on 17 March 2026 (E-001094/2026), Joachim Streit (Renew) asks how the Commission will ensure its new anti-terrorism measures do not impinge upon Member States’ primary responsibility for national security or lead to a gradual centralisation of security competences at the EU level. A response is awaited.
❓ MEPs Seek Details on Incidents Informing EU Drone Action Plan
Fabio De Masi (NI) has asked the Commission (E-001142/2026) to specify the ‘recent incidents’ involving malicious drone use that informed its Action Plan on Drone and Counter Drone Security. The question, submitted on 18 March 2026, also seeks information on who was responsible for these incidents and what evidence exists to classify them as a hybrid warfare threat. A response is pending.
Citizen Services & Single Market
❓ MEPs Question Discontinuation of ‘Your Europe Advice’ Legal Service
Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (S&D) submitted a question (E-001258/2026) on 25 March 2026 about the reported plan by DG GROW to discontinue the ‘Your Europe Advice’ service, which provides free, personalised legal advice to citizens. The query asks if an impact assessment was conducted, what risks are associated with directing citizens to AI tools instead, and whether the service could be transferred to another DG. A Commission answer is awaited.
The Commission’s answers from this period indicate a strong focus on the implementation and defence of established legislative frameworks. In response to scrutiny over the DSA, both from within the EU and from the US, the Commission consistently frames the regulation as a balanced tool that enhances transparency while respecting national laws and fundamental rights. The replies suggest a clear division of labour, with the Commission overseeing VLOPs and setting guidelines, while national authorities, including Digital Services Coordinators and Data Protection Authorities, are positioned as the primary enforcers for other entities and individual cases.
A recurring theme is the Commission’s procedural and legalistic posture. When challenged on its internal transparency or the enforcement of the DMA, its responses rely heavily on existing rules and ongoing dialogues, avoiding definitive statements on specific commercial practices or ongoing investigations. This suggests an institution navigating a complex enforcement landscape, prioritising due process over rapid, public-facing interventions. This approach indicates that the practical impact of the EU’s digital rulebook will unfold through detailed, case-by-case application rather than broad new policy strokes.
All Parliamentary Questions and Commission Answers are accessible via Policy-Insider.AI.
