The European Commission’s Call for Evidence and Public Consultation on the Digital Fairness Act (DFA) is drawing to a close, with citizens, companies, and organizations submitting their views on the proposed legislation. However, a significant concern has emerged: the consultation process itself may be undermining the democratic principles it aims to uphold by favoring one side of the debate.
The structure of the consultation is fundamentally flawed. Respondents who support the DFA are given detailed multiple-choice options to elaborate on their views, along with a free-text field for additional feedback. But those who oppose the legislation—or believe no further action is needed—are limited to a single, predetermined option with no opportunity to explain their reasoning or provide evidence-based arguments. This imbalance risks distorting the Commission’s subsequent impact assessment, which is meant to reflect the diversity of European perspectives.
This issue is not unique to the DFA. It reflects a broader pattern in EU policymaking where consultations often assume support for regulatory action and fail to provide a fair platform for dissent. This approach contradicts the principles of Better Regulation, which emphasizes evidence-based policymaking and inclusive stakeholder engagement. A truly democratic process must allow all viewpoints to be heard, even those that challenge the Commission’s initial assumptions.
Why This Matters
Public consultations are meant to be a cornerstone of democratic governance, ensuring that policymakers hear from citizens and organizations across the political spectrum. Yet, when surveys are designed to favor one outcome, they fail in their purpose. The DFA consultation’s current design risks amplifying the Commission’s agenda while silencing opposition. This undermines public trust and weakens the legitimacy of the resulting policy.
The Problem in Practice
The consultation’s limitations are starkly evident. Supporters of the DFA can engage deeply with the questions, providing nuanced feedback. But those who disagree are confined to a single checkbox. This creates a distorted picture of public opinion, one that may not reflect the complexity of European views on digital regulation.
The Way Forward
The European Commission has the resources and expertise to redesign its consultations to ensure fairness. A neutral, balanced approach would not only align with democratic principles but also improve the quality of policymaking. By allowing all stakeholders to contribute evidence and arguments, the Commission can gather more accurate and diverse input, leading to better-informed decisions.
Conclusion
The DFA consultation highlights a critical flaw in how the EU engages with its citizens on regulatory matters. A one-sided process risks sidelining legitimate concerns and undermining the very foundations of evidence-based policymaking. By adopting a more inclusive and transparent approach, the European Commission can ensure that its consultations truly represent the diversity of European voices
