Skip to main content
PolicySpeak
← All files
APM

Asociace provozovatelů mobilních sítí

Industry association · Czechia

2
positions filed
in the 326 files tracked
2
legislative files
of 326 tracked
2
with a full position paper
attached to a submission

Counts here are a floor, never a total: they cover the 326 consultation files tracked so far (29,503 submissions, mostly 2025–26), so an organization's real filing history is larger, not smaller.

Track Asociace in PolicySpeak: request access →

Work at Asociace provozovatelů mobilních sítí? so we know who speaks for it.

Follow the files Asociace provozovatelů mobilních sítí engages with

One email on Tuesdays when a new position is filed on these 2 files, from Asociace provozovatelů mobilních sítí or from anyone else on them. Only when there is something new.

We use your email for these updates, and PolicySpeak may contact you about the product. Unsubscribe in one click. Privacy policy.

Their record over time

Asociace provozovatelů mobilních sítí filed 2 positions between 9 Jun 2025 and 11 Jul 2025, across 2 of the 326 legislative files tracked here, attaching a full position paper 2 times.

What they argued

Digital Networks Actfiled 11 Jul 2025PDFsource

Digital Networks Act – Call for evidence for an evaluation and impact assessment Response from APMS (Association of Mobile Network Operators), Czech Republic Prague, 11th July 2025 The APMS appreciates the opportunity to contribute to the European Commission's Call for evidence under the Digital Networks Act initiative which builds on the Commission’s White Paper: “How to master Europe’s digital infrastructure…

Opening of the attached position paper · the full paper is on the Commission’s record (source link above)

Amending the NIS 2 Directive as regards simplification measures and alignment with the Cybersecurity Act 2filed 9 Jun 2025PDFsource

Please find enclosed the feedback from the APMS (the Association of Mobile Network Operators), which brings together the three largest mobile operators in the Czech Republic. We strongly oppose giving ENISA additional powers in the field of vendor screening. In the Czech Republic, several state institutions already have this power.

Filed in Czech · English published by the European Commission

Looking for an argument rather than an organization? Search every submission for a phrase and see everyone who used it.

Turns up on the same files

Organizations that also filed on at least two of the same consultations. A shared interest in the same dossiers — not evidence of coordination, and we do not suggest any.

Showing 5 of 69.

Is this your organization?

Everything on this page comes from Asociace provozovatelů mobilních sítí’s own submissions to the European Commission — we have added nothing and interpreted nothing. If something is wrong or out of date, email info@policyspeak.com and we will correct it. If you are an individual named in a record, our privacy policy sets out your rights to correction, objection and removal.

Quotes are verbatim from submissions published by the European Commission, trimmed to their opening passage and never summarized by a model. Organizations only, never individuals. Reused under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU; the European Commission is not liable for this reuse.