The EU AI Act Newsletter #2
16/02/22-01/03/22
Welcome to the EU AI Act Newsletter, a brief biweekly newsletter by the Future of Life Institute providing you with up-to-date developments and analyses of the proposed EU artificial intelligence law.
Legislative Process
The Committee on Culture and Education (CULT) at the European Parliament published their draft opinion on the AI Act. The committee's primary suggestions are to extend the list of high-risk AI applications in areas of education, media and culture under Annex III, and to modify certain provisions related to banned practices under Article 5.
On 3 February, the French Presidency of the Council circulated a compromise text of Articles 16-29 of the proposed AI Act, covering the obligations of users and providers of high-risk systems. Statewatch has recently uploaded the full document online. Since then, the French Presidency has circulated another compromise text of Articles 40-52, which concern harmonised standards, conformity assessments and transparency obligations for certain AI systems. This document is now also publicly available.
The EU's effort to regulate AI will likely take more than a year, with the debate focusing on whether facial recognition should be banned and who should enforce the rules. Parliament may agree on a common position in November, kicking off talks with EU member states that could take up to a year and a half.
Analyses
European Liberal Forum published a policy paper with recommendations to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights in the AI Act, particularly rights that are essential to the rule of law, such as the right to good administration and the right to an effective remedy. It argues that policymakers should pay heed to two ways to respect natural and legal persons’ fundamental rights when AI systems are deployed in the public sector: (1) expanding the definition of high-risk AI systems and (2) creating ex post procedural safeguards.
The Parliament Magazine interviewed Brando Benifei (S&D, Italy), Rapporteur for the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) in the European Parliament on the AI Act proposal. Benifei thinks that a plenary vote on the AI Act can be expected for the autumn. In addition, he spoke about finding the balance between industry requirements and citizens’ protection, biometric recognition, surveillance by AI, and much more.
VoteWatch Europe interviewed Dragoş Tudorache (Renew, Romania) who is the rapporteur for the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) in the European Parliament on the AI Act proposal. He spoke about the definition of AI in the proposal, third-party certifications, administrative costs related to external audits, whether to ban biometric recognition, and much more.
POLITICO's AI: Decoded newsletter discussed the role of the European Artificial Intelligence Board in the AI Act. In the original proposal, the European Commission is given a lot of power, including the power to update the list of high-risk AI systems. Many EU member states are opposed to this, however. Instead, they recommend that the AI Board be assigned the responsibilities of identifying high-risk AI systems and amending the list accordingly. They also want the Board to ensure the consistent application of the regulation.