After almost two years of certified out-of-court dispute settlement (ODS) bodies operating under Article 21 of the Digital Services Act (DSA), the first transparency reports provide early evidence of how this new due process layer operates in practice. Drawing on 2025 data from multiple ODS bodies, this article assesses what value the system is already delivering, and where current constraints, including platform participation and information-sharing, limit its effectiveness. We discuss possible ways forward, including stronger incentives, technical infrastructure and feedback loops.

This post analyses the first major CJEU interpretation of “systemic risks” under the Digital Services Act in Amazon v. European Commission (2025). It argues that the judgment clarifies systemic risks as large-scale societal risks, rejects analogies with financial systemic risk regulation, and provides some guidance on the scope of Article 34 DSA.

By Cecilia Isola 
SERICS (Security and Rights in Cyberspace); University of Genoa

This piece is part of a series with Tech Policy Press featuring articles adapted from selected papers presented at the second DSA and Platform Regulation Conference, an event marking two years since the Digital Services Act came into full effect. 

By Luise Quaritsch, Jacques Delors Centre

This piece is part of a series with Tech Policy Press featuring articles adapted from selected papers presented at the second DSA and Platform Regulation Conference, an event marking two years since the Digital Services Act came into full effect. It examines how the DSA’s systemic risk framework has operated during recent European elections, and the transparency gaps that still complicate efforts to evaluate platforms’ mitigation measures.

By Mateus Correia de Carvalho (PhD researcher, EUI) and Rachel Griffin (postdoctoral researcher, Duisburg-Essen University)

This post presents the report ‘Who speaks and who is heard?’ on civil society participation and participatory justice in DSA systemic risk management. In it, we examine the early practice of DSA participation to understand how it is unfolding in practice. Drawing on a qualitative empirical study with civil society actors of diverse backgrounds, perspectives, and activities, we traced the mechanisms used by those actors, their perceptions about the usefulness of different spaces of participation, the strategic considerations determining when, where, whether, and how to participate, as well as the obstacles and inequalities hampering meaningful participation. Regarding these inequalities, we propose to understand them as a matter of participatory justice, making some recommendations to improve the overall inclusiveness of DSA participation in systemic risk management.