Article brough to you by LeafPlaza: the sovereign European social platform built entirely on European infrastructure, owned and operated in the EU.

Broad scope: Last week, the EU leadership came under scrutiny after they had given public visibility to W Social. This choice came with no visibility on the criteria, procurement process or strategic decision. High-visibility leaders like Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and several others joined the platform. Spokesperson Thomas Regnier publicly migrate his official institutional account from Bluesky to W Social. Then LeafPlaza filled an official complaint.

This is not about Europe vs. the world

LeafPlaza's position is pro-Europe and pro-EU. We believe in European digital sovereignty. This complaint is not against European-made alternatives.

It is about something a lot more basic: public institutions must apply transparent criteria. Showcasing a private project at this level equals legitimacy. If this legitimacy is given without a fair and open process, that is maladministration. It does not matter if a project is European or not.

The reason and the standing of the filling

LeafPlaza operates in the ATProto space, same as W Social. We are a direct competitor for the type of institutional use case the Commission just handed to a single provider without a formal process.

This is not a philosophical objection. We are immediately and directly affected. That gives us a important standing on the matter.

Our complaint argues that the Commission violated core principles of good administration: equal treatment, transparency, and non-discrimination. This is all recorded in the Article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour.

The ask to the Commission

We request four specific remedies:

  • Publish the criteria used to justify public endorsement and institutional visibility for W Social.

  • Clarify whether any procurement, selection, or strategic decision process existed before official account migrations were made.

  • Open a fair process for comparable European providers, including LeafPlaza and Eurosky, to compete for institutional consideration on equal terms.

  • Create a formal channel through which providers can submit proposals to replace Bluesky for institutional ATProto use.

We gave the Commission 30 days to respond. The Commission targets a couple of days for acknowledgement and up to 2 months for resolution.

This is not the first time

This behaviour has precedent. Hence, there are established legal bases to challenge it.

Commission Decision (EU) 2024/3083, Article 4, defines the obligation for institutional conduct in the digital world. In January 2026, watchdog Ekō filed a complaint with the European Ombudsman arguing that EC promotion of specific private platforms violates EU neutrality and fundamental rights obligations. The Ombudsman accepted it as valid basis for review.

The precedents make our case stronger, not weaker.

The other angles we are not pursuing (for now)

Our complaint is narrow and focused. This is an intentional decision to gain on effectiveness. There are, however, other legitimate concerns we believe other actors are better placed to raise.

  • ID verification requirements on W Social and their implications

  • Ethics of senior EU leaders acting as product endorsers for commercial platforms without disclosure

  • Technological concerns, including W Social closed-source codebase. This raises direct concerns about the EC's stated commitments to open & auditable digital infrastructure.

  • Data sovereignty and data privacy, given that W Social is a Swedish company but its governance and audit trial are not documented in any way.

  • The role of other EU leaders and institutions apart of the Commission and Mrs. von der Leyen.

We encourage journalists, civil society, and other affected parties to push these angles and any other that might arise. The more voices, the better picture. More pressure from more directions might force a change.

Coming next

If the Commission responds satisfactory, we will report that. The condition is to publish criteria, opening a fair process, or acknowledging the concerns. However, we have no high hopes on this matter.

We are already working on the escalation to the European Ombudsman as the next and logical step. We are also considering further actions as the situation develops, at both European and Estonian level (LeafPlaza is a company registered in Estonia).

We will keep our community up to date. Follow us for more updates.

LeafPlaza is a European social platform built entirely on European infrastructure, owned and operated in the EU. Please consider to support us in our quest to build more European sovereign infrastructure.