Apple temporarily removed the messaging platform Telegram from its App Store after identifying content that violated its policies on child sexual abuse material, before restoring the application once the offending content was removed. The incident comes as Telegram and its founder, Pavel Durov, continue to face mounting regulatory and legal scrutiny in several countries over allegations of inadequate content moderation and the platform’s handling of illegal material.
Apple has confirmed that it briefly removed the messaging application Telegram from its App Store after a review found content that violated the company’s policies prohibiting child sexual abuse material.
The disruption occurred shortly after 01:00 GMT on Tuesday, when users began reporting that the popular messaging service was no longer available for download. Approximately one hour later, the application reappeared on the App Store.
Telegram acknowledged the restoration in a brief statement, saying, “Telegram has been restored on the App Store and should soon be available again for all users,” without providing further details. The company’s official account on X also responded to reports of the temporary removal with the message: “Reports of my demise are greatly exaggerated.”
Apple later clarified the reason for the brief suspension in a statement provided to 9to5Mac. The company said the application had been removed after its review process identified content that breached its “strict guidelines prohibiting child sexual abuse material.”
According to Apple, Telegram acted quickly after being notified of the issue. “The app was subsequently restored after the developer promptly removed the content and banned the user who posted it,” the company said.
Telegram, which says it has more than one billion monthly active users, has for years faced criticism in several countries over what regulators and authorities describe as insufficient content moderation and an inadequate response to illegal activity on the platform.
The latest incident follows a series of regulatory actions against the messaging service. Last week, Australia’s telecommunications regulator launched civil proceedings against Telegram, alleging that the platform failed to detect and remove “pro-terror material”, including videos depicting terrorist executions and mass shootings.
The company is also facing legal pressure in Russia. Last month, Russian authorities placed Telegram founder Pavel Durov, who was born in Russia, on a wanted list on terrorism charges and designated him as a person involved in terrorism and extremism. Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) alleges that Durov failed to remove a dating chatbot that Ukraine allegedly used to recruit young Russians to carry out acts of arson and other forms of sabotage.
Durov, who has lived outside Russia since 2014, rejected the allegations, stating that he had been placed on the terrorist list “for refusing its demands for mass surveillance and censorship on Telegram.”
Russia first blocked Telegram in 2018 before lifting the restrictions two years later, citing the company’s cooperation with authorities in combating terrorism. However, the service was banned again in February 2026 over alleged violations of Russian law.
Durov has also faced legal challenges elsewhere. In 2024, he was briefly detained at an airport outside Paris after French authorities accused him of allowing organised crime to flourish on Telegram. He later alleged that French intelligence services had sought to pressure him into implementing political censorship, including restricting conservative voices during Romania’s disputed 2025 presidential election campaign. French authorities have denied those claims.
Telegram has also experienced temporary suspensions in Brazil. Authorities there blocked the messaging platform in March 2022 and again in April 2023, accusing it of failing to prevent the spread of misinformation and neo-Nazi chat groups.
The brief removal from Apple’s App Store adds to the growing international scrutiny surrounding Telegram’s content moderation practices as governments and technology companies continue to examine how digital platforms respond to illegal and harmful content while balancing wider concerns over free expression and online regulation.
