The door to digital sovereignty is open, please come in

For decades, a community of developers, activists, researchers and public officials has quietly worked on the idea that free and open-source software based on open standards is not only the best technical choice, but also the only one compatible with democratic governance.

We have created the necessary tools, overseen migrations and provided user training. We have also drafted policy documents and presented them to committees.

We have documented the consequences of public documents being readable only by software developed in a single country, managed by a single company and subject to the laws of a different jurisdiction, as well as the commercial decisions of a board of directors.

The French gendarmerie, the Austrian Ministry of Defence and the German state of Schleswig-Holstein – to name but a few examples – have taken action, alongside regions, provinces and cities across Europe.

We have always been here, and not with a product to sell, but with the knowledge, patience and sincere conviction that public institutions belong to the public, and that this also applies to their digital infrastructure.

Sometimes we were listened to, but far more often we were merely tolerated, at best with a smile that seemed to say: “I know, but what can I do about this?”

And now, suddenly, the situation has changed, and not because the arguments have changed – there was no need for that – nor because the technology has changed, as it was already excellent.

The situation has changed because the geopolitical balance has shifted, and the dependence that once seemed a convenience now appears for what it has always been: a structural vulnerability.

We are glad that this moment has arrived, and we like to think that this clarity – which the evidence never managed to achieve – is also down to us, and not just the geopolitical crisis.

But we ask European citizens, and through them those who govern European countries, to understand one extremely important thing: the door to digital sovereignty does not open simply by choosing different software, but by understanding what sovereignty actually entails.

It requires open document formats, not as a preference, but as a legal and technical guarantee that a document produced today will be readable in thirty years’ time, by any compliant application, without the permission of any company. The format is not a detail, but the foundation.

It requires open fonts, because a document displayed differently on different systems is not an interoperable document, regardless of the standard it claims to follow. The display layer is just as important as the data layer.

It requires continuity of expertise: the people and institutions that have carried out this work, often without recognition and sometimes without resources, are not a lobby to be managed but a valuable repository of knowledge to be engaged.

It requires honesty about what “open” means. A coalition that speaks of digital sovereignty but chooses as its default document format one designed to replicate the behaviour of proprietary software is not building sovereignty but a new dependency under a different banner.

We have been here for years, and we will still be here for years to come.

The FOSS ecosystem did not need a geopolitical crisis to believe in open standards. We have always believed in them, because they are right—technically, legally, and democratically.

Now that Europe is ready, we have just one request: listen to us carefully, unlike what you have done in the past. The lesson is not simply “use free and open-source software”. The lesson is: understand why it is important, and understand it thoroughly.

The tools exist, the knowledge exists, and above all, the community exists.

What happens next will depend solely on you: Europe’s digital sovereignty could become a genuine architectural commitment or remain yet another rebranding of dependency.

We hope, and would like to be sure, that you choose the first option.

Over the coming weeks, four articles will explore these topics in depth: the architecture of document formats, the hidden politics of font rendering, lessons learned from real-world migration experiences, and what a credible European policy on open standards would actually look like. We invite you to read them.