No one is supposed to ignore the law, as Pavel Durov will have learned in France. Even a billionaire can be stopped when he gets off a jet. Photo: Shutterstock

No one is supposed to ignore the law, as Pavel Durov will have learned in France. Even a billionaire can be stopped when he gets off a jet. Photo: Shutterstock

The arrest of the founder and CEO of Telegram, Pavel Durov, on the tarmac of Paris’ Le Bourget airport, has reignited the debate on the difficulty of striking the right balance between privacy and the secrecy of correspondence on the one hand, and the fight against crime on the other.

She wanted to see Paris. He may up seeing the Santé Prison. The founder and CEO of Telegram, Pavel Durov, born in Russia and a French citizen since 2021, was arrested as he stepped off his jet on the evening of . His detention has been extended until Wednesday. His companion, in the meantime, will have had plenty of time to discover the charms of the capital of the Enlightenment.

The French courts are accusing the messaging service, which has 900m users worldwide, of shielding a host of criminals, thanks to encryption, which is not standard in the application but must be chosen by the user. Paedophiles, terrorists, drug traffickers, cryptocurrency kings, refugee smugglers and mafiosi. But it also allows opponents, journalists and other members of the public to avoid being exposed to the wrath of control-hungry politicians.

Telegram’s bridgehead is registered in the Seychelles and its HQ in Dubai. But Durov--who left Russia in 2014, threatened by Putin who wanted access to the conversations of his opponents--will already have learned that he will not enjoy absolute impunity wherever he is, as he refuses to answer to the authorities, whether French or European. If the French justice system were to decide to investigate him, it would also have to keep him in preventive detention or risk never being able to get hold of him again.

His arrest is first and foremost publicity for his technology, since it highlights the inability of the authorities to access the private data of the suspected criminals they are targeting, outside of undercover operations. . The inability to do so is only temporary, since the ecosystem is set to change as a result of quantum technology and artificial intelligence.

In an April 2024 ruling, the , pointing out that “even though the freedom of expression and the confidentiality of personal data are primary considerations, those fundamental rights are nevertheless not absolute. In balancing the rights and interests at issue, those fundamental rights must yield on occasion to other fundamental rights or public-interest imperatives, such as the maintenance of public order and the prevention of crime or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

But Durov’s arrest also reopens the debate on the modern version of the hierarchy of norms, formalised in the seventeenth century, including among those pursuing a particular battle. Take the fight against child pornography. Some of those who are very committed to the battle are against abolishing encryption, which they believe also protects children and their parents from the greed of paedophiles.

The debate is no closer to being over than that on the commitment of technology suppliers to limit the negative effects of technology on our rule of law. For example, on the subject of child pornography, one of Europe’s leading child protection organisations estimates that 62% of illegal content is hosted in Europe. Do web hosts have a greater role to play? Are they doing enough? It’s a big question, isn’t it? And even if they are officially cooperating with the authorities to limit their negative impact, are they going far enough? Can there be acceptable limits? If we transpose the European regulations regarding the ESG responsibilities of large companies, could we put an end to this deplorable statistic? Could the authorities also ensure that the content disseminated by porn kings does not conceal the use of under-age women or men, or even sex slaves, locked up 24 hours a day in a room to generate profit?

Arresting a billionaire head of a company with 900m customers is no mean feat. It sends out a strange signal to the tech world, which is gradually getting used to being held to account, even when dragging its feet. On Tuesday 27 August, Meta founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in the midst of the US campaign, sent a letter to the chairman of the US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, Jim Jordan, denouncing the pressure his group had been subjected to during covid. “A great victory for freedom of expression,” said the Republican on X (formerly Twitter).

On Sunday, as soon as Durov’s arrest was announced, Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski, another player in the sights of the French authorities, took off, announcing that he was leaving Europe immediately. In front of another American commission at the beginning of July, the Toronto native explained that, at France’s request, he had removed access to the news sites before contesting the request before the French courts.

It will be interesting to see what changes this arrest brings to the debate between those convinced of the virtue of absolute freedom and those concerned with maintaining law and order. For the moment, Durov and Telegram are in the dark.

This article was originally published in .