AAfter the curious announcement of the arrest of Mr. Pavel Durov, founder of the social network Telegram, and his placement in police custody for five days, the Paris public prosecutor announced on Wednesday, August 28, that the latter had been indicted and placed under strict judicial supervision, prohibiting him from leaving the national territory.
It was curious, indeed, to note that the founder of a communications platform used by nearly 1 billion people worldwide, particularly prized by defenders of freedoms in the Russian-speaking world, where Mr. Durov comes from, was thus constrained. In France itself, many political leaders favor this communications network.
If this social network enjoys such a good reputation, it is above all because it does not belong to an American company, which exempts it from the Cloud Act. This American law, in force since 2018, allows the American judicial authority to ask any company under American law for access to data, even if it is stored abroad.
Lack of cooperation from Telegram
Also, Mr. Durov, having established silence as a principle, has refused in the past, with his platform VKontakte, to transmit the data of Russian opponents to the Moscow government. Today he maintains ambiguous relations with the Kremlin. His past positions nevertheless arouse the interest of those who seek increased confidentiality and see in this discretion a guarantee of security.
Read also | Article reserved for our subscribers Françoise Daucé, sociologist: “The arrest of Pavel Durov marks the emergence of sovereign digital spaces”
Add to your selections
Telegram has also become a tool of choice for users with less honorable intentions, who see it as a protection for their misdeeds. The platform is in fact used by criminals who exchange information on methods of credit card fraud, methods of money laundering through cryptocurrencies, or who offer narcotics or counterfeit products for sale.
Faced with these crimes or offenses, the judicial authorities are faced with a lack of cooperation from Telegram, which does not provide any information, forcing investigators to find other means, sometimes complex and unsuccessful, to identify suspects.
A surprising position
The law on confidence in the digital economy of June 21, 2004, known as “LCEN”, qualifies social networks such as Telegram as hosts. As such, these platforms are not responsible for the content posted online by users. The law nevertheless imposes certain obligations on them, such as the obligation to cooperate with the judicial authority when the latter requests information on the identity of account holders who have engaged in illicit actions.
You have 48.1% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
