Two Berlin-based NGOs, Democracy Reporting International (DRI) and the Society for Civil Rights (GFF), are suing Elon Musk’s X for refusing to grant them access to public platform data under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA). (Photo by Nathan Stirk/Getty Images)

News

Berlin NGOs sue Musk’s X over German election data access

Share

Two Berlin-based NGOs, Democracy Reporting International (DRI) and the Society for Civil Rights (GFF), have sued Elon Musk’s X under the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) for refusing to grant them access to public platform data.

The groups claimed they needed the data to investigate potential election manipulation ahead of Germany’s February 23 election.

A Berlin Regional court initially ruled in their favour on February 6, ordering X to provide full access to its data.

X then challenged the decision, citing potential judicial bias due to the fact that one of the judges had previously been a trainee at GFF.

The case is now back in court but the NGOs have complained that any ruling may come “too late” for meaningful election research.

While other platforms have co-operated, X has refused, the NGOs alleged, prompting the their continued legal action.

Following the Berlin court’s initial ruling, Michael Meyer-Resende, executive director of DRI, said: “We consider it our right under the Digital Services Act DSA to access this data and contribute to the public good by shedding light on how political campaigns unfold on social media platforms.”

The NGOs said X “used to be one of the most open platforms for research”, adding that Big Tech had increasingly restricted data access.

They insisted the DSA ensured transparency was not “left to corporate goodwill” but legally enforced.

In a column published on February 27 in the European newspaper EUobserver, the NGOs detailed their intention of making their court case a potential landmark ruling in the application of and compliance  with the DSA.

“Until now, platforms have enjoyed broad discretion in determining how long they can take to respond to data access requests. This ruling may help establish a benchmark for what constitutes a reasonable timeframe,” they wrote.

“If the current decision is upheld, it could establish jurisdiction for courts in the country where the researcher resides”, they added.

They said they believed the case could also affect EU relations with Big Tech companies.

“This case has symbolic value by setting a powerful precedent for how the EU could engage with US tech giants.

“By affirming the enforceability of the DSA, the court could signal to other jurisdictions in the EU that robust oversight of big tech is achievable,” they said.