Assumptions 1 and 2 are valid based on the provided passage.

Assumption 1: State should have some institutions to ensure its appropriate role in a digital society. The passage emphasizes the State's active responsibility to ensure that rights, such as free expression and privacy, are not thwarted by private forces in the digital age. This active role, which extends beyond mere abstention, inherently implies the necessity of established institutional mechanisms and frameworks to effectively implement and enforce these protections within a complex digital environment.
Assumption 2: State should ensure that private parties do not violate the citizens' right to privacy. The passage explicitly states that "The role of the State, therefore, is not just to abstain from preventing rightful free expression, but also to actively ensure that private parties are not able to block it." This directly supports the assumption that the State has a duty to actively prevent private entities from infringing upon citizens' rights, including the right to privacy, in the digital realm.

Assumption 3: Digital economy is not compatible with the idea of not violating the citizens' privacy. The passage does not assert an inherent incompatibility between the digital economy and the protection of citizens' privacy. Instead, it highlights the challenges to privacy in the digital age and underscores the State's crucial role in actively safeguarding these rights within this context. The focus is on the need for robust state action to ensure privacy, rather than declaring the digital economy as fundamentally incompatible with it.