Brussels is tightening its grip on some of the internet’s fastest-growing services, designating ChatGPT, Reddit and Roblox for heightened scrutiny under the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA), writes Catherine Feore.

The European Commission said all three services meet the 45 million average monthly users threshold in the EU, triggering the DSA rules reserved for digital players considered large enough to pose systemic risks to European society.

“These new designations mean that ChatGPT, Reddit and Roblox will now be held to a higher standard of scrutiny and accountability in the European Union,” said Henna Virkkunen (pictured), the Commission’s executive vice-president for tech sovereignty, security and democracy.

The move puts the companies firmly in Brussels’ regulatory crosshairs. They must assess and mitigate risks ranging from illegal content and harm to minors to threats to fundamental rights, elections, public security, and users’ physical and mental well-being. Importantly, the designation also gives the Commission investigative powers to scrutinise relevant features and systems underpinning the services.

ChatGPT has been designated a Very Large Online Search Engine (VLOSE), while Reddit and Roblox are now Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs). They have until the end of January 2027 to comply with the DSA’s tougher obligations.

ChatGPT’s inclusion is particularly significant. The Commission considers the AI service a hybrid product that qualifies as an online search engine because it can search the web when answering users’ queries, bringing a major generative AI service into the DSA’s toughest tier of oversight for the first time.

The Commission will supervise compliance with the DSA, in cooperation with Coimisiún na Meán (Ireland’s media regulator) for ChatGPT and Reddit, and the Dutch Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) for Roblox.

With the latest additions, 28 platforms and search engines have now received the EU’s “very large” designation.

Photo credit: Commissioner Virkkunnen Photographer: Lukasz Kobus © European Union

Adilet wins 110 seats in the 145-member Kurultai, while four smaller parties share the remaining 35, writes Georgi Gotev.

Kazakhstan’s Central Election Commission announced final results on 25 August confirming a decisive victory for the Adilet party in the country’s first elections to the new unicameral Kurultai. Adilet won 71.17 percent of the vote and 110 of the 145 seats, establishing a dominant position in the legislature created under the constitution that took effect on 1 July.

Adilet is the recently formed pro-presidential party in Kazakhstan created months before the elections as the successor after the long-ruling Amanat party dissolved into it.

Final figures show 9,351,539 ballots cast from an electoral roll of 12,623,289, for a turnout of 74.08 percent. Five parties cleared the 5 percent threshold required for representation:

Adilet: 6,528,948 votes (71.17 percent) — 110 seats

Auyl People’s Democratic Patriotic Party: 574,621 votes (6.26 percent) — 10 seats

Respublica: 509,631 votes (5.56 percent) — 9 seats

Aq Zhol Democratic Party: 478,083 votes (5.21 percent) — 8 seats

Nationwide Social Democratic Party: 469,058 votes (5.11 percent) — 8 seats

The People’s Party of Kazakhstan (3.11 percent) and Baytaq Green Party (1.07 percent) fell short. A further 2.51 percent of voters chose the “against all” option.

The Kurultai replaces the former bicameral parliament and is elected entirely by proportional representation from party lists in a single nationwide constituency. The 23 August vote was the first parliamentary election held under the new constitutional framework approved in a March referendum.

First session convened

President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has signed a decree convening the inaugural session of the Kurultai for 28 August at 11 a.m. The opening will formally launch the work of the new 145-member legislature and mark the next stage in implementing the institutional changes introduced by the constitution.

Once the Kurultai begins its work, the sitting government is required to resign. Under the new rules, the president will nominate a candidate for prime minister after consultations with the party factions represented in the chamber. The appointed prime minister then has ten days to propose the structure and composition of the cabinet; ministers are appointed by the president following further consultations with the Kurultai.

The constitution also creates the office of vice president. Tokayev has indicated that an appointment — “a well-known person you all know” — would be announced within days of the election and must receive Kurultai approval within two months of the first session. The vice president may not serve as a lawmaker or belong to a political party and would assume presidential powers if the head of state leaves office early.

Experts: Higher stakes for parties and foreign policy

At an expert discussion organised by the Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies (KazISS) on 24 August, analysts said the vote raises the stakes for political parties, the functioning of the new parliament, and Kazakhstan’s positioning amid growing geopolitical interest in Central Asia.

KazISS Director Zhandos Shaimardanov highlighted the combination of high turnout and a dominant party alongside four smaller ones as features likely to shape the legislature. “The task now is to understand how this electoral choice will translate into the work of the new Kurultai, its legislative priorities and the parties’ day-to-day activities,” he said.

Italian Asia expert Domenico Palmieri stressed that the election itself is only the beginning. The real test of the institutional reform will come in the months ahead as deputies begin legislating. He noted the relatively high turnout compared with many European countries and described the voting process as technically smooth.

Political scientist Andrey Kazantsev cautioned against reading the strong participation solely as enthusiasm for party politics. In a period of international uncertainty, many voters appeared more concerned with the country’s overall direction and the future for their families. Because deputies are now elected exclusively from party lists, parties face greater responsibility for translating public expectations into concrete policy. “The demand is high. Now the parties have to provide the supply side,” he said.

Ken Moriyasu of the Hudson Institute placed the transition in a wider regional and global context. Interest in Central Asia has risen in both Washington and Beijing as the United States seeks to diversify critical mineral supplies away from China and Beijing looks to overland Eurasian routes less vulnerable to maritime disruption. “Both China and the U.S. are trying to escape each other, and they’re meeting each other in Central Asia,” Moriyasu observed. Greater clarity and stability in Kazakhstan’s domestic institutions, he argued, could strengthen Astana’s ability to maintain its multi-vector foreign policy and contribute to gradual regional consolidation.

What comes next

With final results certified and the first session scheduled for 28 August, attention turns to the practical launch of the new system: formation of the government, the appointment of a vice president, and the early legislative agenda of a chamber in which one party holds a commanding majority while four others retain a formal presence.

The high turnout and orderly conduct of the vote have been widely noted. Whether the new Kurultai delivers more responsive and effective governance – and how the dominant Adilet faction works with the smaller parties – will determine if the constitutional redesign of 2026 translates into lasting political change.

On 13 August, Zambia re-elected President Hakainde Hichilema for a second term in a historic landslide vote which was independently verified against public polling-station records. Yet since that day, a handful of so-called statistical critiques have circulated questioning the result. It is crucial to walk through what the underlying data actually show, writes Dr Namuunda Mutombo.

Start with how the count was verified from the more than 13,000 polling stations. Results in Zambia are recorded on Gen 20 forms, completed and displayed publicly at each polling station, in front of party agents and observers, before a single figure travels anywhere. That is the record of what happened, station by station, and it is available for anyone to check against the final declaration. Independent monitors did check it. Transparency International Zambia ran its own parallel count against those station-level forms and found it matched the electoral commission's figures to within roughly one percentage point. SADC observers, covering the near totality of the polling stations they visited, reported a calm and orderly process. None of this is the electoral commission grading its own homework. It is outside verification, against a public paper trail, converging on the same number.

The other claim making the rounds is more technical: that in some constituencies, more people voted for president than for their MP, and that this gap is suspicious. As a statistician, I would ask anyone making that argument to first rule out the far more mundane explanation, which is roll-off, the well-documented tendency, in any democracy holding simultaneous elections, for turnout to differ across the ballot depending on how satisfied voters are with each race. Survey work published earlier this year (ironically by those academics now making the negative claims), before a single vote was cast, already told us to expect exactly this pattern here: strong national approval for the president alongside real frustration with sitting MPs in specific provinces. When the geography of the "gap" lines up precisely with where that pre-election dissatisfaction was strongest, the simplest explanation is usually the right one. It is not manipulation. It is Zambians voting for a president and against an MP in the same afternoon, which is their right; and exactly what was predicted.

No election, anywhere, is without noise, complaint, or contested reading of the data. That is not a Zambian shortcoming; it is what elections are in democracies worldwide. The standard by which a result should be judged is not whether every number is uncontested, because by that standard no democracy on earth would ever pass. The standard is whether the process was open enough, and the paper trail public enough, that the disputes can actually be checked, and whether they change the outcome when you do. Here, they don't. Even the more skeptical readings of the data, taken at face value, leave the president's win comfortably intact.

That is, in the end, also the judgment the country's own political actors have reached. The National Reconciliation Party for Unity and Progress, the opposition party which fought a hard campaign and won roughly 60 parliamentary seats in the process, has formally accepted the result, congratulated President Hichilema, and said it will now focus on its role as a check on government from within Parliament. That is what functioning democratic competition looks like: parties that contest hard, then accept the count and get to work.

Zambia's constitution provides a clear, evidence-tested route for any candidate who still disputes the outcome: a petition to the courts, not a headline. That door remains open. What the data do not support is the idea that the result itself is in doubt. I would simply ask that the same rigor applied to the graphs be applied to the conclusions drawn from them.

Dr Namuunda Mutombo is a seasoned Demographer with over two decades of experience. He holds PhD, MA, and BA degrees in Demography, and serves as a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Demography, Population Science, Monitoring & Evaluation at the University of Zambia.