On Tuesday in May 2026, Human Rights Watch (HRW) released a report titled “Looking the Other Way: EU Failure to Prevent Surveillance Exports to Rights Violators,” across the European Union (EU) finding states member failing to stop surveillance exports to governments with documented rights abuses through weak enforcement of the 2021 Dual-Use Regulation and FOI analysis data.
Human Rights Watch says the European Union is failing to control surveillance exports, allowing member states to supply intrusive monitoring tools to governments with known records of repressing dissent, journalists, and activists.
The findings are based on a 54-page investigation assessing how the EU’s 2021 Dual-Use Regulation operates in practice.
HRW concluded that despite its intent to restrict technologies with civilian and military uses, the framework is being unevenly enforced and lacks transparency across the bloc.
The report draws on freedom of information requests sent to all 27 EU member states, with only about half responding. Among those, at least six countries were found to have licensed surveillance tools to more than two dozen governments with documented human rights concerns, including Azerbaijan, Rwanda, Uganda, Vietnam, and the United Arab Emirates. Bulgaria and Poland were specifically cited for exporting interception and intrusion technologies.
The findings suggest a fragmented human rights violations regulatory system where oversight depends heavily on national authorities.
Fragmented Enforcement Across Member States
Human Rights Watch’s senior surveillance researcher, Zach Campbell, warned of systemic failure, saying, “European surveillance tech is being licensed for export to countries with long, well-documented histories of using similar technology to violate rights,” he said.
“It is apparent that European institutions that should be controlling these exports are failing to do so,” as he continued to mention.
Member states including France, Germany, Greece, Italy, and Spain reportedly refused to release export data, deepening concerns about fragmented oversight of surveillance exports across the bloc.
This lack of cooperation has created major blind spots in understanding the full scale of exports leaving the EU. Researchers say the inconsistent disclosure practices make it difficult to assess whether existing safeguards are being applied uniformly across all member states.
Commission Rules and Transparency Gaps
Human Rights Watch also criticized the European Commission’s 2024 guidelines, which separate reporting of technology types and destination countries, making it difficult to track specific surveillance exports.
A Commission spokesperson said the body “attaches great importance to the issue of cyber-surveillance items” and that rules must evolve with security risks. However, HRW argues that this undermines transparency and weakens public oversight, leading to human rights violations.
The Commission is scheduled to evaluate the Dual-Use Regulation in 2026, with HRW urging stricter due diligence and full disclosure requirements on surveillance technology regulation.
The report also highlights broader concerns about accountability and corporate responsibility in Europe’s surveillance industry, where profit incentives may outweigh human rights safeguards.
“It appears as if EU countries and EU-based surveillance companies are putting profits above people despite adopting one of the most progressive regulations to curtail the sale of this harmful technology,” Campbell said.
HRW is calling for stronger enforcement, clearer reporting obligations, and mandatory human rights checks for companies exporting sensitive technologies, warning that without reform, surveillance exports from Europe will continue to enable repression abroad.
Inside Telecom provides you with an extensive list of content covering all aspects of the tech industry. Keep an eye on our Cybersecurity sections to stay informed and up-to-date with our daily articles.
