A few days ago, I learned that several TikTok accounts were posting videos showing people desecrating the Quran. They were tearing it, trampling on it, and soiling it, while adding comments that encouraged hatred against Islam and Muslims.

Three accounts were reported to the police. At least one of the people involved lives in Moldova. A case was opened and assigned. Yet the videos remained online.

Online, a hateful video does not sit quietly while the authorities complete their paperwork. It spreads. It gets copied. Other people repost it and use it as an example to create more hateful content. By the time an officer moves the case through the normal process, the damage may already be done. Online hate speech is not a small problem that develops slowly. It is a spark landing on dry grass.

TikTok is classed as a Very Large Online Platform under the European Union’s Digital Services Act. The DSA gives public authorities a way to act against illegal online content.

Article 9 allows authorities in EU member states to order platforms to remove specific illegal content. Article 10 allows them to request information. We are not a member state, but TikTok is head-quartered in one. In simple terms, the police can ask TikTok to remove the videos and provide information about the people behind the accounts. They can make the request through TikTok’s official DSA contact point in Dublin. They can also involve the relevant European authorities when necessary.

That does not appear to have happened. At least, the content is still visible.

When a platform leaves a hate campaign online for several days, it is not simply storing one post. Its systems may continue showing that post to more people. Other accounts can repost it, cut it into shorter clips, share it elsewhere, and keep it circulating long after the original video is removed. One video can quickly become hundreds. At that point, the harm is no longer limited to one insult or one account. It reaches entire communities. It spreads fear and makes abusive behaviour appear normal.

Criminal investigations take time. Police work can be slow because evidence must be collected and checked. But that is not a good reason to leave illegal content online. Removing a video is not the same as proving a criminal case in court. One requires urgency. The other requires detailed evidence. The two processes are connected, but they do not need to move at the same speed. Treating them as one task is like sending firefighters to an emergency and asking them to complete the paperwork before putting out the fire.

The technology already exists too. TikTok uses video-matching and content-recognition technology to identify copyrighted music and videos. Similar technology can help identify repeated uploads of hateful content and limit their spread. When a platform can detect the same song across thousands of videos, it should also be able to detect copies of the same hateful video before they spread further. The question is not whether the technology exists. The question is whether anyone decides to use it.

Moldovan police need a rapid-response process for sending platform removal requests under the DSA. Officers dealing with hate speech complaints should know exactly who to contact, what information to request, and when to escalate the case. Requests involving harmful online content should be treated as urgent communications. When a case involves people or platforms in different countries, the authorities should also begin coordinating with international partners as early as possible. Those channels already exist.

There is still time to act against the videos currently circulating. The police can send a removal request. They can request information about the account holders. They can treat repeated uploads as part of one wider campaign rather than as separate and unrelated incidents. They can make it clear that digital hate speech in Moldova will not be handled through slow and casual paperwork.

The internet moves quickly. Law enforcement must learn to move quickly too when the harm is immediate. When the law exists, use it. When the tools exist, activate them. When a hateful video can spread within minutes, removing it should not take months.