Overview
This report provides an analysis of Parliamentary Questions (PQs) and Commission Answers published between 16.03.2026 and 22.03.2026. The key policy areas addressed include the enforcement and interpretation of the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act, with a strong focus on platform accountability, protection of minors, and combating online gender-based violence. Other prominent topics include the implementation of the Digital Markets Act (DMA), data protection under the GDPR, cybersecurity frameworks like the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA), and the EU’s broader digital single market strategy.
In its replies, the Commission consistently positions itself as a firm enforcer of its new digital rulebook. It frequently references ongoing proceedings, clarifies the scope of existing legislation, and points to future legislative revisions to close loopholes. The institutional tone is procedural and evidence-based, framing its regulatory actions as a proportionate and necessary means to protect fundamental rights, ensure user safety, and maintain a fair and competitive digital single market.
These developments offer crucial insights into the Commission’s evolving enforcement priorities and its interpretation of key legislative provisions, signaling a clear focus on systemic risks, the protection of vulnerable users, and the integrity of the EU’s digital ecosystem.
Digital Services Act (DSA) & Platform Accountability
❗ Commission Defends DSA Against Allegations of Censorship, Citing Transparency and Fundamental Rights
In a firm rebuttal to a report alleging the Digital Services Act (DSA) undermines freedom of expression, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen stated on 19 March 2026 that the Commission rejects the “unsubstantiated and unfounded allegations.” The answer to question P-000551/2026 frames the DSA as a democratically enacted regulation that sets “unparalleled standards for user empowerment” and fundamental rights safeguards. The Commission highlights the DSA’s transparency requirements, including public access to risk assessments and key enforcement decisions, as core to its accountability framework, and asserts it will continue enforcing the act in a “firm, fair and evidence-based manner.”
❗ Commission Confirms DSA Proceedings Against X Over Compliance Failures
Responding on 17 March 2026 to a question (E-000243/2026) from Catherine Griset (PfE) about platform X’s compliance with the Digital Services Act (DSA), Executive Vice-President Virkkunen confirmed that the Commission had concluded that X’s practices were non-compliant. The Commission found that the ‘blue checkmarks’ feature deceived users, the advertisement repository failed transparency requirements, and access for eligible researchers was unduly restricted. The response notes that X’s announcement to make its algorithm open source occurred after the Commission’s decision and the investigation period.
❗ Commission Outlines DSA and AVMSD Framework for Protecting Minors Online
In a 16 March 2026 reply, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen detailed the EU’s legal framework for protecting minors from harmful content. The answer to question E-000357/2026 highlights that the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) requires Member States to ensure services that may impair minors’ development are restricted through measures like age verification. It also notes that under the Digital Services Act (DSA), designated platforms must assess and mitigate systemic risks, including those to mental health and well-being, and that the Commission is assessing the need for further action in its ongoing review of the AVMSD.
❗ Commission Affirms Legal Frameworks to Combat Hate Speech Against Christians
On 16 March 2026, Commissioner McGrath responded to question E-000118/2026 concerning incitement to discrimination against Christians in cultural works. The Commission stated that its funding processes include rigorous checks to exclude entities engaged in incitement to hatred or violence. While noting that Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA criminalises public incitement to violence or hatred based on religion, the Commission clarified that the investigation and prosecution of specific cases of alleged hate offences remain a national competence.
❗ Commission Reaffirms DSA Rules on Virtual Currencies and In-Game Purchases for Minors
Executive Vice-President Virkkunen, in a response on 17 March 2026 to Catherine Griset (PfE), addressed the risks of virtual currencies in video games for minors (E-004963/2025). The Commission underscored that its Digital Services Act (DSA) guidelines explicitly warn against techniques that reduce the transparency of economic transactions for minors, citing certain virtual currencies as an example. While not all video games are classified as online platforms under the DSA, the Commission stressed that other legal instruments, such as consumer and data protection acquis, apply. It also mentioned that the upcoming Digital Fairness Act is exploring how to address problematic features in digital products impacting minors.
❓ MEPs Question Commission on DSA Staffing and Costs
In a follow-up question (E-000947/2026) submitted on 7 March 2026, MEPs Petra Steger (PfE) and Mary Khan (ESN) are seeking updated figures on the number of staff hired for Digital Services Act (DSA) implementation by the end of 2025 and the associated personnel costs. They also inquire about hiring plans for 2026 and ask the Commission to rule out the possibility of the DSA leading to a permanent “censorship and surveillance apparatus.” A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ MEPs Raise Alarm Over Alleged US-Backed Platform to Circumvent DSA and DMA
Yvan Verougstraete (Renew) has asked the Commission about a reported US-based platform, ‘freedom.gov’, allegedly designed to offer EU citizens a VPN service to circumvent EU legislation like the Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act. The question (E-000965/2026) of 9 March 2026 queries whether the Commission views this as an attack on Europe’s regulatory sovereignty or a form of digital interference, and what steps it will take to prevent systematic circumvention of EU law. A Commission answer is awaited.
❓ MEPs Probe DSA Enforcement on Algorithmic Amplification of Extremist Narratives
In question E-001007/2026 from 11 March 2026, Angelika Winzig (PPE) asks the Commission what action it is taking under the Digital Services Act (DSA) to minimise the algorithmic amplification of extremist narratives related to the Yemen conflict. The query also seeks information on how the Commission monitors risk assessments and remedial measures undertaken by platform operators. A response from the Commission is pending.
AI Act & DSA Interplay
❗ Commission Confirms DSA Investigation into X’s AI ‘Grok’ for Systemic Risks
In two separate but related answers published on 19 March 2026, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen addressed concerns over X’s AI assistant, ‘Grok’, being used to create non-consensual sexualised images. Responding to questions E-000114/2026 and E-000198/2026, the Commission confirmed it launched proceedings against X on 26 January 2026 under the Digital Services Act (DSA). The investigation is assessing if the platform properly mitigated systemic risks associated with Grok, including the dissemination of illegal content and negative effects related to gender-based violence. The Commission also noted the 2024 Directive on combating violence against women will criminalise such content, and that proposals to strengthen the AI Act are being discussed.
❗ Commission Cites AI Act and DSA as Safeguards Against Harmful AI Chatbots for Minors
Executive Vice-President Virkkunen addressed the risks of AI companion chatbots for minors in a response (E-000256/2026) published on 18 March 2026. The Commission highlighted that the AI Act prohibits manipulative AI systems likely to cause significant harm and establishes transparency obligations. It also noted that the Digital Services Act (DSA) requires platforms to ensure a high level of safety for minors and mitigate systemic risks to mental well-being. The Commission pointed to its DSA guidelines on minors, the Action Plan Against Cyberbullying, and ongoing work on an EU approach to age verification as part of its comprehensive strategy.
Digital Markets Act (DMA) & Competition
❓ MEPs Press Commission on Google’s Planned Android App Restrictions
A group of Renew MEPs, led by Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, has questioned the Commission on Google’s reported plans to require identity verification for all apps installed on Android devices from September 2026. In question E-000971/2026, submitted on 9 March 2026, they express concern that this could violate the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and EU competition rules by limiting the distribution of apps outside the Google ecosystem and hindering independent developers. A Commission response is pending.
❓ Commission Questioned on Potential DMA Non-Compliance Investigation into Amazon
Following a ruling by the German Bundeskartellamt on Amazon’s price control mechanisms, a large cross-party group of MEPs has asked the Commission about potential violations of the Digital Markets Act (DMA). Question E-000989/2026 of 10 March 2026 asks what steps the Commission has taken since July 2025 to ensure Amazon complies with Article 5(3) of the DMA, whether it will open a formal non-compliance investigation, and if it will impose interim measures. The Commission’s answer is pending.
Data, Cybersecurity & Resilience
❗ Commission Clarifies Data Protection and Cybersecurity Rules for AI Chatbots and Browser Extensions
In a 17 March 2026 response from Commissioner McGrath (E-000056/2026), the Commission outlined the multiple layers of EU law applicable to browser extensions interacting with AI chatbots. The reply specifies that processing personal data requires a lawful ground under the GDPR and that accessing information on a user’s device must comply with the e-Privacy Directive. Furthermore, the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) will introduce mandatory security-by-design requirements for such products, while the AI Act will impose risk management and cybersecurity rules for high-risk AI systems. The Commission noted that enforcement of GDPR and e-Privacy lies with national authorities.
❓ MEPs Seek Commission’s View on Spanish Cybersecurity Breach and NIS2 Transposition
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez (PPE) has questioned the Commission about a recent major cybersecurity breach affecting Spanish police and government systems. The question (E-000973/2026), submitted on 9 March 2026, asks for the Commission’s assessment of the threat to EU security, what support measures are available to Member States, and whether Spain’s failure to transpose the NIS 2 Directive leaves it in a vulnerable position. A response from the Commission is pending.
❗ Commission Defends Data Collection Methods in Children’s Questionnaire
Responding to concerns about a questionnaire for children on gender and LGBTQI+ identity (E-005004/2025), Commissioner Minzatu stated on 18 March 2026 that the survey was a voluntary tool for children to express views on poverty and social inclusion. The Commission asserted the survey was designed to protect anonymity, with no personal data shared, thus parental consent was not requested. It clarified that the initiative did not intervene in national education systems, respecting Member State competences and the principle of subsidiarity.
❗ Commission Outlines Plans for AI Use in Migration Management
In a response on 18 March 2026, Commissioner Brunner addressed the use of technology in asylum procedures, particularly for age assessment (E-000012/2026). The Commission noted that while there are no EU-level statistics on age assessment, new regulations require a multi-disciplinary approach with the child’s best interests as the primary consideration. The reply also referenced the Asylum and Migration Management Strategy, which supports using new technologies, including AI, to improve decision-making, and announced plans to set up a Forum for AI on Migration to identify possible uses.
❓ MEPs Question AI Act Implementation for Creative Sector
Lara Magoni (ECR) has raised concerns about fraud in the cultural and creative sectors from the misuse of AI to generate artificial engagement, thereby distorting markets and depriving legitimate creators of revenue. Question E-000998/2026 of 11 March 2026 asks the Commission how it will ensure transparent implementation of the AI Act’s obligations in the digital creative sector and what measures it is considering to protect creators and strengthen consumer trust. A Commission response is pending.
❓ Commission Probed on Evaluation Criteria for AI Projects in Special Education
Ilhan Kyuchyuk (Renew) submitted a question (E-001003/2026) on 11 March 2026 concerning the evaluation of innovative digital projects for special education under EU programmes like EIC Pathfinder. The query focuses on how the Commission ensures interdisciplinary expertise in evaluations, considers the social and ethical impact of AI solutions for individuals with neurodevelopmental needs, and assesses the global market potential of such innovations. A response is awaited.
❗ Commission Affirms Flexibility of EU Product Rules for Circular Economy Models
In a 13 March 2026 reply to Maria Guzenina (S&D), Executive Vice-President Séjourné addressed the perceived regulatory conflict between circular economy objectives and single market product safety rules (E-000414/2026). The Commission stated that the current New Legislative Framework (NLF) does not create barriers to circularity and offers necessary flexibility, with full conformity assessment only required for ‘substantial modifications’ to a product. It confirmed that an upcoming revision of the NLF aims to ensure full coherence between circularity and product safety, and that the forthcoming Circular Economy Act will further accelerate the transition.
❓ MEPs Question Lack of European Video-Sharing Platforms
Catherine Griset (PfE) has highlighted the absence of any large European online video-sharing platforms, noting that EU creators are reliant on US platforms designated as VLOPs under the DSA. In question E-000976/2026 from 10 March 2026, she asks if the Commission will implement a more flexible regulatory environment to foster competition, consider mandating algorithm transparency, and why competition law has failed to prevent an oligopoly. The Commission’s response is pending.
❓ Commission Queried on Future Funding for Anti-Disinformation Tools
Ana Catarina Mendes (S&D) raised concerns about the sustainability of free, open-source tools for journalists and fact-checkers developed through Horizon Europe projects like InVID, WeVerify, and Vera AI. Question E-001004/2026 of 11 March 2026 asks the Commission to explain why no new funding is planned as the Vera AI project concludes and what its strategy is to ensure the future availability of European-made solutions to tackle disinformation. An answer is pending.
❓ MEPs Scrutinise Commission’s Role in ‘Scaleup Europe Fund’
Dick Erixon (ECR) and other MEPs have questioned the Commission about the new ‘Scaleup Europe Fund’, which aims to invest in areas like AI and space technologies. The question (E-000950/2026) from 8 March 2026 seeks clarity on the proportion of taxpayer funding, the investment selection criteria, and whether the Commission sees risks in “politicians choosing winners and losers” rather than the market. A response from the Commission has not yet been published.
❗ Commission Plans to Reinforce Market Surveillance for Imports via European Product Act
In two separate answers published on 17 and 18 March 2026, Executive Vice-President Séjourné outlined plans to strengthen controls on imports from third countries. Responding to questions on industrial goods (E-005012/2025) and dangerous cosmetics (E-005070/2025), the Commission stated that the upcoming revision of the Market Surveillance Regulation, as part of a European Product Act (EPA), aims to ensure a level playing field. The revision will consider stricter accountability for representatives of foreign manufacturers and using tools like the Digital Product Passport (DPP) to make checks more effective. The Commission also noted that the upcoming customs reform will reinforce the capabilities of EU customs.
❓ MEPs Raise Concerns Over Montenegro’s Draft Security Laws and EU Standards
Vladimir Prebilič (Verts/ALE) has asked the Commission to assess the compatibility of Montenegro’s draft Law on Internal Affairs and Law on the National Security Agency with EU fundamental rights standards. Question E-001013/2026 of 11 March 2026 highlights provisions that allow dismissal based on classified information and access to citizens’ data without prior judicial authorisation, questioning their alignment with the GDPR, Law Enforcement Directive, and the EU Charter. A Commission response is pending.
❓ Commission Questioned on EU Response to Internet Shutdowns in Iran
Hannah Neumann (Verts/ALE) has probed the Commission on its response to recurring internet shutdowns by Iranian authorities. The question (E-001020/2026) of 11 March 2026 asks for an assessment of the impact on human rights, what concrete measures are being taken through digital diplomacy, and whether the Commission intends to expand support for circumvention tools and secure communication technologies for Iranian citizens. An answer is awaited.
❓ MEPs Seek Clarity on ‘EU Legal Gateway’ in India
Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) and Tom Vandendriessche (PfE) are seeking details about the planned ‘European Legal Gateway Office’ in India, intended to support legal migration for ICT specialists. In question E-000939/2026 submitted on 6 March 2026, they ask for clarification on the office’s legal basis, funding, staffing, and its relationship with existing Member State consulates and the EU Delegation. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Commission Probed on AI, Big Tech, and Data in Health Policy
Friedrich Pürner (NI) has raised concerns about the integration of the EU4Health programme into the proposed European Competitiveness Fund. Question E-000865/2026 of 3 March 2026 asks which technologies will be prioritised, what risks are associated with dependence on big tech companies for developing AI systems with public health data, and how the Commission will ensure democratic accountability and prevent the commodification of health. A response is pending.
❓ MEPs Ask Commission to Promote Standards for Health Data and Waiting Times
Highlighting issues with healthcare waiting times and data governance in Sicily, Giuseppe Antoci (The Left) has asked the Commission about its role in improving healthcare access. The question (E-000983/2026) of 10 March 2026 queries if the Commission intends to promote comparable standards for monitoring waiting times and for the interoperability of booking systems, and what tools it will strengthen to help Member States reduce pressure on health services. A Commission answer is awaited.
An analysis of the Commission’s answers reveals a clear and consistent focus on the operationalisation and enforcement of the EU’s landmark digital legislation. The Commission repeatedly frames its actions, particularly under the Digital Services Act, not as novel interventions but as the diligent application of democratically enacted law. By referencing ongoing proceedings against major platforms like X, the Commission signals a transition from rule-making to active implementation, positioning itself as a robust regulator of the digital space. This enforcement posture is consistently justified by the need to protect fundamental rights, a narrative that serves to counter allegations of overreach or censorship.
A cross-cutting theme is the protection of vulnerable users, which emerges as a central pillar of the Commission’s digital policy agenda. Replies concerning AI chatbots, virtual currencies in gaming, and non-consensual imagery all converge on the imperative to shield minors and combat gender-based violence. The Commission’s strategy appears to be one of regulatory layering, where the specific obligations of the DSA, the AI Act, and sectoral rules like the AVMSD are presented as a cohesive framework designed to mitigate systemic risks to society’s most vulnerable. This suggests that the impact on these groups will be a key metric for evaluating the success of the EU’s digital rulebook.
Finally, the Commission’s responses indicate a continuing drive to harmonise the digital single market and ensure a level playing field. Whether addressing third-country imports, the circular economy, or the security of browser extensions, the Commission points towards a more integrated regulatory and surveillance system. The planned European Product Act and revisions to market surveillance rules suggest an ambition to close loopholes exploited by non-EU actors and to ensure that all products and services, digital or physical, adhere to the same high standards of safety and compliance, thereby reinforcing both consumer protection and the EU’s economic sovereignty.
All Parliamentary Questions and Commission Answers are accessible via Policy-Insider.AI.
