The 2026 Surveillance Map: 10 European Nations Becoming "Digital Police States”

Do you really believe you are free when you  walk through your city? At this very moment,   in Europe, there are governments using artificial  intelligence to predict your moves, tracking every   euro you spend and reading your private chats,  even those protected by end-to-end encryption.

Today we take you inside the 10 countries that  have turned security into near-total control.   Warning: we are not here to condemn these nations.  We know that certain reforms were necessary for   our safety. But that is exactly the point: we must  also be aware of the other side of the coin and

ask ourselves, are all these controls necessary  or have we gone too far? Many will say, "If you’re   not doing anything wrong, why worry?" But is it  really that simple? Stay until the end, because   we will reveal the true heart of the problem  that affects us all. Welcome to Amazing Europe!

Number 1: Spain.
Spain is a living laboratory  of how technology can be used to make the state   work better, of course with some downsides. For  example, when the government realized that the   shadow economy was worth around 17% of GDP, it  decided it was time to tackle the problem.
To

flush out tax evaders, the Revenue Agency used a  big-data system that processes information from   hundreds of different sources, including the  location of your smartphone. Using anonymous   phone metadata from operators, they can calculate  with surgical precision whether you have spent

more than 183 days abroad, thereby exposing  people who claim to live in London or Dubai but   actually spend most of their time in Spain. And  to cripple money laundering? No cash transactions   above €1,000 between professionals. The message is  clear: every euro must leave a digital trail. The

downside? The end of financial privacy.
But when  you have such powerful tools in your hands, the   temptation to use them for other purposes becomes  strong. And this is where the 2022 CatalanGate   comes in. Citizen Lab discovered that more than 60  phones belonging to Catalan independence leaders,

lawyers and even family members had been  infected with Pegasus, the spyware that   turns your phone into a covert listening  device. The Spanish intelligence services   admitted to monitoring 18 of those targets  with judges’ authorization, saying they did it

to "defend territorial integrity." In the other  40 cases, however, there is no clarity. And the   uncomfortable question left hanging is this: in a  democracy, when does using digital weapons of war   to settle internal political disputes go too far? Number 2: Denmark.
Denmark is often painted as

the paradise of social trust, one of the happiest  countries in the world. But beneath this perfect   surface lies a very different reality: Copenhagen  has turned its geography into a global bargaining   chip.
Everything revolves around the submarine  fiber-optic cables that link Northern Europe and

run right beneath Danish waters. The government  understood that those cables are a goldmine for   intelligence and made a clear strategic  choice: become America’s ear in Europe.   The "Operation Dunhammer" scandal revealed that  Danish intelligence literally opened their doors

to the U.S. NSA, allowing them to physically tap  into these cables to spy on leaders from Germany,   France, Sweden and Norway, including Angela  Merkel. And for Danish citizens? No leniency.   The government enforces one of the most  stubborn data-retention laws in Europe.

Even though the Court of Justice of the EU  ruled that indiscriminate retention of phone   and internet data for all citizens is illegal,  Denmark stubbornly continues to log it. The   Ministry of Justice openly defies European courts,  arguing that without blanket monitoring of data

traffic the police would be blind to crime. The  Danish compromise may be the most cynical of all:   Denmark sacrificed part of its own privacy and  European trust to remain a strategic U.S. partner.   The obvious question is: what is national  sovereignty really worth if you’ve already

handed the back-door key to someone else? Number 3: Italy.
In Italy, the protection   of privacy often collides with an indisputable  imperative: the "Fight Against the Mafia." Under   this shield, the country has developed one of the  most pervasive systems of judicial surveillance

in the West. The first pillar is data retention.  While Europe debates time limits, Italy requires   providers to store calls and data traffic for  up to six years for serious crimes. A measure   the judiciary deems absolutely vital, and which  has allowed prosecutors to convict mafia clans

by reconstructing contacts going back years. The  downside, however, is technical and undeniable: to   enable these investigations, providers are obliged  to keep enormous historical archives of everyone’s   connections, making the population’s digital  history available to authorities for a very

long time. In 2024 the "Piracy Shield" was added.  To protect broadcasters’ TV rights for football, a   platform can block IP addresses within 30 minutes  of a report, without prior judicial review. An   administrative automaticity designed for speed,  it has nevertheless raised technical criticisms

for the risk of mistakenly knocking offline  legitimate services unrelated to piracy. Finally,   Italy makes significant use of so-called "state  Trojans," software that allows investigators to   access mobile devices. With recent legislation,  their use has become an established practice for

complex investigations into corruption  and crime. The choice has been made:   total digital memory in exchange for security.  No connection forgotten, no data deleted.  Number 4: Poland.
Poland shows us what happens  when surveillance tools are deeply integrated

into political struggle and border control. Here  the central issue is not only national security,   but the erosion of democratic oversight over  police operations. The first warning sign arrived   in 2016 with the so-called "Surveillance  Law". This rule granted law enforcement

and intelligence extraordinary powers: direct  access to citizens’ metadata (who you call,   which sites you visit and where you are) without  the need to obtain a prior judicial warrant. The   justification was anti-terror efficiency, the  argument being that the police must be able

to act quickly. The result, however, is that the  judicial filter that should protect citizens from   abuse was removed for everyday data access.
But  the availability of these technologies led to   worrying abuses. Recent investigations uncovered  what has been called the "Polish Watergate":

the use of the military spyware Pegasus against  prominent opposition figures. During decisive   electoral campaigns, rival politicians’  phones were hacked not to thwart attacks,   but to extract private messages later used to  discredit them on public media.
Finally, attention

turns to the eastern border. To manage the  migration crisis and tensions with Belarus, Warsaw   erected a high-tech barrier equipped with seismic  and thermal sensors. This defensive project was   accompanied by the creation of "exclusion zones"  closed to journalists and NGOs, effectively

producing areas of the country where surveillance  is total but independent witnesses do not exist.  Number 5: Russia.
Russia represents a fundamental  case study for understanding the future of digital   surveillance, a system where technology and  state power merge without filters or mediation.

At the center is SORM, a mechanism that overturns  Western rules on privacy. Forget formal requests,   judicial authorizations and waiting times. Every  telecom operator must install hardware that   connects their servers directly to FSB terminals.  The result is that agents gain real-time access to

calls, messages and data traffic without asking  anyone’s permission.
Then there is the issue of   the Sovereign Internet. Deep inspection devices at  network nodes allow the state not only to filter   unwanted content, but also, when necessary, to  isolate the Russian internet completely from the

rest of the world, ensuring total national control  in any crisis scenario.
And then there is Moscow,   transformed into a gigantic machine of sight. More  than 200,000 cameras with facial-recognition scour   every corner of the capital. The numbers  are clear: car thefts have collapsed,

crimes are solved by the thousands, suspects  are identified in seconds. But there is a   dark flip side: the same algorithms that catch  thieves also track dissidents, map protests and   erase anonymity from the streets. Walking  in Moscow means being constantly recognised,

constantly tracked. Technology has made Moscow  undeniably safer and investigations immediate,   but the price is boundless power. And here is  the question that reveals the complexity of   the situation: security or privacy? Which is your  priority? Are the two destined to remain forever

opposed? Write your opinion in the comments. Number 6: Germany.
Germany is probably the   biggest shock in this ranking. Historically seen  as a stronghold of privacy in memory of the Stasi,   Berlin has in recent years made a quiet but  radical turn, becoming Europe’s leader in

digital surveillance. The breaking point was the  legalisation of "state Trojans". Law enforcement   complained about "Going Dark", the inability to  read chats protected by encryption on WhatsApp   or Signal. The solution? Authorise the federal  police to legally hack devices. The state malware

infects the phone and reads messages directly on  the screen, before encryption or after decryption,   thus bypassing end-to-end protection. The  compromise is heavy: to preserve this capability,   the state has an interest in leaving security  holes open in software, making all devices more

vulnerable.
But Germany also wants to predict.  Several Länder, such as Hesse and Bavaria,   have adopted predictive policing software  provided by Palantir. These systems aggregate   vast amounts of data, weaving a web of contacts  that links suspects and ordinary citizens into

a single investigative network. Although the  Constitutional Court struck down some practices   as disproportionate, politicians are pushing to  rewrite the laws. In Bavaria the concept was taken   to the extreme with the "Imminent Danger" law,  which allows police to act not only when a crime

has been committed, but when it is suspected  that one might occur. Germany now stands at   a crucial crossroads. These technologies are  introducing a logic of "algorithmic prevention",   where the risk is that attention shifts from  acts actually committed to behaviours software

deems potentially dangerous, challenging the  country’s historic constitutional limits.  Number 7: Hungary.
In Hungary surveillance does  not arise from chaos, but from an extremely   structured legal framework that prioritises  rapid action by the executive. The country often

operates under a legal regime called the "State  of Danger", renewed repeatedly over the years to   manage different crises. This setup allows the  government to legislate by decree, speeding up   security procedures in a way unthinkable in other  European parliaments. It is within this context of

"defending sovereignty" that the Pegasus case  fits. International technical analyses found   traces of the military spyware on the phones  of investigative journalists and owners of   independent media. The government has not denied  using the technology, but has insisted that every

operation was carried out in full compliance  with Hungarian law. And that is the focal point:   in Hungary the definitions of "national security"  are broad enough to legally permit monitoring   figures who in other countries would be considered  untouchable. But control does not stop at

sensitive cases; it affects anyone who sets foot  in the country. With the VIZA system, Budapest has   automated a monitoring practice that is spreading  across Europe, making it relentless. Every hotel   and guesthouse is required to digitally scan  guests’ documents and send them to a central

police server. It is not an isolated exception,  but confirmation of a continental trend:   the state wants to know exactly where every single  person sleeps each night. A model of absolute   public order that leaves open the question:  does any private space still exist, even on

holiday, where the authorities cannot enter? Number 8: Greece.
Greece marks the point of no   return in our ranking. If elsewhere surveillance  is a matter of bureaucracy or taxes, in Athens it   has taken on the contours of a political espionage  thriller worthy of the darkest regimes. The world

calls it “Predatorgate.” Investigations revealed  that key figures of Greek democracy — such   as investigative journalist Thanasis Koukakis  and opposition leader Nikos Androulakis — were   targeted by Predator, a military-grade spyware  capable of turning a smartphone into a total

bug.
The chilling coincidence is that those same  people were, at the same time, under "legal"   interception by the intelligence services, an  agency that by law reports directly to the Prime   Minister’s office. Although the Prime Minister  denied any personal involvement, the scandal

was severe enough to force the intelligence chiefs  and his own right-hand man to resign. In any case,   the lesson is clear: the state holds the keys  to enter your private life and is not afraid   to use them against "internal enemies."
But do  not think this concerns only politicians. The

numbers point to systemic surveillance: in 2021  alone more than 15,000 interception orders were   issued for "national security." A frightening  figure for a country of 10 million people,   suggesting a cavalier use of espionage far beyond  hunting terrorists. And to complete the circle of

impunity, the government changed the rules of  the game while the match was still on. With a   2021 amendment, the data protection authority was  banned from informing citizens that they had been   spied on, even after investigations concluded and  even if no crime had been committed. In Greece,

if Big Brother listens to you, by law you  no longer even have the right to know it.  Number 9: France.
France is the European  laboratory for the surveillance of the   future. Here, the trauma of terrorist attacks  pushed the state to cross a boundary Europe

had never crossed before: entrusting security to  Artificial Intelligence. The turning point was   the 2024 Olympics. With Article 7 of the "Olympic  Law," France became the first nation in the Union   to legalize algorithmic video surveillance.  Cameras no longer simply record; they are

linked to software that analyses crowd movements  in real time to detect "anomalous behaviour." The   stated goal is to prevent panic or attacks, but  the result is that public space has become an   environment where an algorithm constantly  judges whether the way we walk or gather

is "normal" or "suspicious."
At the same time,  France has centralized the nation’s biological   identity. The "TES" database now holds biometric  data — facial photos and fingerprints — for 60   million citizens in one massive archive. Security  experts have severely criticized this choice:

creating a single honey pot containing the  identity of an entire people is an open   invitation to foreign state hackers.
Finally,  invisible surveillance: since 2015 internet   providers have been required to install  government "black boxes" on their networks.

These devices scan web-traffic metadata for  complex patterns that could indicate a terrorist   threat. France poses the toughest question of  all: to feel protected from "lone wolves," are we   willing to accept an automated "pre-crime" system,  where a machine decides who deserves investigation

based on secret mathematical calculations? Before revealing the tenth, and perhaps   most unsettling, country and exposing  the real problem behind this situation,   if you found this video informative we kindly  ask you to support our project with a like,   subscribe to the channel and click the bell so you  don’t miss our new videos. And we also remind you

of our new channel, America versus Europe, where  we rank all European countries, the United States   and Canada according to different factors. Number 10: United Kingdom.
The   United Kingdom could top this ranking because it  is the only country that has combined physical,

digital and economic surveillance into a  single Panopticon. Physically, London is the   world capital of monitoring: with one camera for  every ten residents and police vans scanning faces   along shopping streets, urban anonymity is dead.  Legally, the "Snooper’s Charter" forces providers

to retain every citizen’s web history for a year,  making our browsing habits accessible to dozens   of state bodies without a warrant. And with the  Online Safety Act, the government threatens to   scan private messages on WhatsApp and Signal,  breaking the encryption that protects us.
Yet

despite this surveillance, the country, especially  England, still has a significant crime rate. But   the final blow to freedom came with the Starmer  government’s proposal on Digital Identity. The   measure provides that a digital ID will become  mandatory to exercise the "right to work." The

Prime Minister’s phrase, "You will not be able to  work in the United Kingdom without a digital ID,"   sparked mass protests and petitions with millions  of signatures. Critics warn that if the right to   earn a living depends on a centralised digital  permission, the state will have acquired the power

to "switch off" a citizen’s economic existence  with a single click. London offers the ultimate   bargain: total transparency in exchange for  security, and not even very effective security.   But when the government’s eye is everywhere (on  the street, in chats, and in the future even on

your employment contract), do you feel safer or  just like a model prisoner in an open-air jail?  And this question leads us to the real question  we must ask ourselves. If we look closely at these   ten countries, we notice they are all linked by  three invisible red threads.
The first is the Cost

of Calm: from the United Kingdom to Russia, the  demand for order and protection has been so strong   that we have normalised the idea of living under  a magnifying glass, allowing technology to filter   everyone’s life in order to intercept the threats  of a few.
The second is the Logic of Traceability:

in Spain and Italy it was decided that the only  effective way to fight the shadow economy is to   illuminate every transaction. Cash and  anonymity have been sacrificed on the   altar of fiscal efficiency, creating a system  where honesty is proven only through data.
The

third is the Tool Dilemma: as seen in Greece or  Hungary, when a government possesses "digital   weapons" capable of seeing everything,  the temptation to use them grows strong.   Software designed to stop very serious threats  therefore risks being used to control dissent

or manage internal crises, silently shifting the  boundary of what is acceptable in a democracy.  Of course, we must not be naive: we know full  well that terrorism, mafias and online crime   are real threats. Many of these technologies have  saved lives and solved seemingly impossible cases.

No one wants to return to a defenceless world.  But it is precisely here, in this grey zone,   that the fundamental question of our time  lies. These systems were born for emergencies,   but they have become the norm. Are we  ready to accept a new social contract

where the only way to be considered an honest  citizen is to become completely transparent,   permanently renouncing the right not to  be watched? What is the limit beyond which   "security" becomes a gilded cage?
The answer does  not belong to governments, nor to technology. It

belongs to us.
Tell us your view in the comments. And since we have talked several times about the   problem of tracking cash, if you want a  more complete picture of the situation   we recommend watching this video, where  we reveal the ten European countries with

the largest hidden economies. That’s  all for this video. See you next time.