Forordningen om digitale tjenester betragtning 125
Dansk sprogudgave pr. 2026-10-06 tier 2 Forordning (EU) 2022/2065, CELEX 32022R2065
Beføjelserne til at føre tilsyn med og håndhæve andre due diligence-forpligtelser end de yderligere forpligtelser til at styre systemiske risici, der pålægges udbydere af meget store onlineplatforme og af meget store onlinesøgemaskiner ved denne forordning, bør deles af Kommissionen og de nationale kompetente myndigheder. På den ene side kunne Kommissionen i mange tilfælde være bedre i stand til at håndtere systemiske overtrædelser begået af disse udbydere, f.eks. overtrædelser, der berører flere medlemsstater, alvorlige gentagne overtrædelser eller manglende etablering af effektive mekanismer, der kræves i henhold til denne forordning. På den anden side kan de kompetente myndigheder i den medlemsstat, hvor en udbyder af en meget stor onlineplatform eller en meget stor onlinesøgemaskine har sit hovedforretningssted, være bedre i stand til at håndtere individuelle overtrædelser begået af disse udbydere, som ikke rejser systemiske eller grænseoverskridende problemer. Af hensyn til effektiviteten, for at undgå overlapning og for at sikre overholdelse af ne bis in idem-princippet bør det være op til Kommissionen at vurdere, om den finder det hensigtsmæssigt at udøve denne delte kompetence i en given sag, og medlemsstaterne bør ikke længere have mulighed for at gøre det, når den har indledt en procedure. Medlemsstaterne bør arbejde tæt sammen både indbyrdes og med Kommissionen, og Kommissionen bør arbejde tæt sammen med medlemsstaterne for at sikre, at det tilsyns- og håndhævelsessystem, der indføres ved denne forordning, fungerer gnidningsløst og effektivt.
English language version pr. 2026-10-06 tier 2 Forordning (EU) 2022/2065, CELEX 32022R2065
The powers of supervision and enforcement of due diligence obligations, other than the additional obligations to manage systemic risks imposed on providers of very large online platforms and of very large online search engines by this Regulation, should be shared by the Commission and by the national competent authorities. On the one hand, the Commission could in many instances be better placed to address systemic infringements committed by those providers, such as those affecting multiple Member States or serious repeated infringements or concerning a failure to establish effective mechanisms required by this Regulation. On the other hand, the competent authorities in the Member State where the main establishment of a provider of very large online platform or of very large online search engine is located could be better placed to address individual infringements committed by those providers, that do not raise any systemic or cross-border issues. In the interest of efficiency, to avoid duplication and to ensure compliance with the principle of ne bis in idem , it should be for the Commission to assess whether it deems it appropriate to exercise those shared competences in a given case and, once it has initiated proceedings, Member States should no longer have the ability to do so. Member States should cooperate closely both with each other and with the Commission, and the Commission should cooperate closely with the Member States, in order to ensure that the system of supervision and enforcement set up by this Regulation functions smoothly and effectively.