Police in Amsterdam seized a server belonging to Autistici/Inventati (A/I), an Italian-based internet service provider offering free email and web-hosting services, following a request from U.S. authorities. The server was taken from a data center in Amsterdam's eastern district, and Dutch authorities are now transferring its data to the United States.
The U.S. designated Autistici/Inventati as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist" in August, claiming the group operates "digital infrastructure for violent Antifa cells and other far-left militants." Following the designation, the organization disbanded as its users and donors faced potential legal repercussions.
Legal Authority Questions
Legal experts have questioned whether Dutch law permitted the seizure. According to Yuriy Brisov, a lawyer at Digital & Analogue Partners, the seizure occurred under a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) signed between the United States and EU states in 1981. The treaty allows countries to request assistance from one another for criminal investigations.
Under the MLAT framework, Dutch authorities conducted the seizure using Dutch law and Dutch powers at the U.S. request. However, Brisov noted that Dutch law permits authorities to refuse requests if they harm essential interests, concern a political offense, or constitute double jeopardy. Additionally, seizures are only permitted when alleged conduct qualifies as a crime in both countries with sentences exceeding one year.
Brisov emphasized that designating a group as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist" does not require a conviction or court hearing. Neither the Dutch government nor the European Union adopted the U.S. designation.
Concerns Over Political Motivation
Privacy advocates have criticized the seizure as politically motivated. Harry Halpin, CEO of privacy infrastructure firm Nym, told Decrypt the targeting represented a "terrifying precedent" and questioned whether Dutch authorities adequately scrutinized a request rooted in political differences rather than criminal conduct.
Brisov noted that internet hosts typically are not liable for user activity under both U.S. law and EU law through the Digital Services Act, raising questions about the legal basis for holding the service provider responsible.
