The article is authored by Natali Helberger (University of Amsterdam), José van Dijck (Utrecht University) and Claes H. de Vreese (University of Amsterdam). Together they draw on expertise in law, media studies and political communication, offering a collective perspective on the implications of Europe’s AI governance model.

They describe how Europe has constructed a comprehensive digital regulatory framework over recent years, including the GDPR, the Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act, the Data Act and the AI Act. These instruments aim to limit concentrated technological power, safeguard public values and enable alternative infrastructures. The central question they raise is whether these rules will be consistently enforced, especially amid calls from some technology companies to delay or weaken implementation.

Their perspective emphasises that enforcement is essential for both technological and democratic sovereignty. A clear regulatory framework supports innovation by reducing investor risks, offering clarity to professionals in sectors such as healthcare, mobility and media, and increasing citizens’ trust. Without demand for AI systems aligned with European values, Europe’s aspiration for technological sovereignty remains uncertain.

The authors further argue that democratic digital sovereignty extends beyond promoting “AI made in Europe.” It requires technologies grounded in European principles such as interoperability, open standards, sustainability and respect for fundamental rights. They stress the importance of strong public institutions, noting that regulators, researchers, journalists and civil society organisations must have the capacity to hold technology companies accountable.

They conclude by calling for a complementary Continental AI Democracy Action Plan to strengthen democratic resilience and Europe’s institutional capacity to govern and enforce its own frameworks. Only then, they argue, can Europe act autonomously and secure a democratic digital future.