When is the company Meta in June 2024, adopted an amended privacy policy, civil society and supervisory authorities in member states Of the European Union they reacted without delay.
Namely, Meta then announced that it was starting to develop its new artificial intelligence model, using data from users of the social networks Instagram and Facebook. This was followed by the reaction of the Irish data protection authority, as a result of which (at least temporarily) Meta stopped the mentioned project. The company then adjusted its approach and, following the rules of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), enabled users to file a complaint, i.e. request that their data be excluded from the model training and development process.
The same (amended) privacy policy also applied to users from Serbia and other countries of the Western Balkans. Their content, including public posts, likes and
comments, as well as geolocation data, data about devices and interactions with content, and data collected outside the platforms themselves through partners, became part of the data set for training and developing Meta's artificial intelligence model.
However, unlike users from the European Union, users from Serbia were not informed about these changes even before they came into effect. The target did not provide them with either transparent information or a realistic opportunity to make an informed statement before the processing began. This compromises the principle of honest and transparent data processing, which is the basic pillar of the legal protection of privacy in Serbia.
Namely, our Personal Data Protection Act was established on the same principles as the GDPR. However, the lack of oversight, as well as significantly lower penalties, allow digital platforms to use user data with significantly fewer restrictions. The Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Protection of Personal Data is
reacted to this situation by initiating contacts with Meta and other technology companies in order to draw attention to the obligation to appoint local representatives and to harmonize the treatment of Serbian citizens with EU citizens. Cooperation was also achieved with related bodies from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro, in order to draw attention to
the marginalized position of the entire region on the digital global map. However, in practice things remained unchanged. Thus, it has been proven once again that the copied regulations compared to those in the European Union do not guarantee an equal level of protection for our citizens.
An example of this is the recent coordinated attacks on the Instagram accounts of independent media, organizations and activist groups, such as Radar, Nova.rs, Autonomija info, CRTA, Istinomer, and others. The attacks resulted in the temporary suspension and even the deletion of certain accounts, among other things due to the slow and inadequate reaction of Meta, which has no representative in Serbia, so the process of establishing the facts of each case is carried out automatically and mostly without the knowledge of the local context.
The impression is that big companies use the regulatory gap and institutional weaknesses as an excuse not to respect the standards of protection of digital rights of users, and to avoid responsibility for their violations. In addition, the size of the market (even if we are talking at the level of the Western Balkans region) and the syndrome of "small languages", do not give enough incentives to companies to invest in business compliance in our area or in direct cooperation with our supervisory bodies. For example, certain African or Latin American countries, although not too economically strong, managed to put pressure on large companies due to the fact that the number of users from their territories is measured in hundreds of millions.
Thus, while international supervision, including European regulatory authorities, increasingly focuses on the responsibility of digital platforms, Serbia continues to face challenges in the application of current legislation. This is especially worrying considering that the digital space remains almost the only free source of information for citizens, and space for their democratic action. Finally, the announced "reforms", such as the proposed changes to the Criminal Code and the Law on Public Order and Peace, do not inspire hope that things will develop in a better direction.
What, then, is the solution (if any)?
It is clear that Serbia, and not even the entire Western Balkans, will become a large market overnight, nor will large technology companies suddenly become sensitive to human rights issues. At least not without adequate incentives or the threat of sanctions. But what can be accelerated is the region's approach to the single digital market of the European Union. For some countries (on all occasions and above all, for Montenegro), entry into this zone becomes certain in the next couple of years. For others, it is difficult to predict. One of the models that the European Commission could consider is the accession of the countries of the region to the single digital market before full membership in the Union. In this way, our citizens will not only have declaratively equal rights as EU citizens, but will also be able to receive their effective protection. Finally, at a time when the digital space is practically a battlefield and a special zone of interest of non-democratic global players, rounding off the European information ecosystem would not only be in the interest of our citizens, but also of the European Union itself.
The author is the executive director of the organization Partners Serbia
