Sarah Chander, senior policy adviser at EDRi, suggested that key civil society recommendations aimed at safeguarding fundamental rights from AI overreach are being rebuffed by the Council. She highlighted opposition from Member States to a full ban on the use of remote biometrics ID systems in public, no agreement on registering the use of high-risk AI systems by law enforcement and immigration authorities, and no clear risk classification process for AI systems. Benifei warned that if the Council does not give ground, there is a risk the whole Act could fail, which would have stark implications for fundamental rights in an age of increasing automation.
Key takeaways:
- Negotiations between European Union lawmakers on a risk-based framework for regulating artificial intelligence (AI) applications are at a "complicated" and "difficult" stage, according to Brando Benifei, MEP and one of the parliament’s co-rappoteurs for AI legislation.
- Issues causing division include prohibitions on AI practices, fundamental rights impact assessments, and exemptions for national security practices. Benifei suggested that parliamentarians have red-lines on all these issues and want to see movement from the Council.
- There is heavy industry lobbying targeted at Member States’ governments on how to regulate generative AI and foundational models. French AI startup Mistral and German AI startup Aleph Alpha are reportedly lobbying governments to push back on dedicated measures to target generative AI model makers.
- If the talks fail to achieve consensus, the EU’s bid to be a world leader in setting rules for artificial intelligence could be at risk. The next AI Act trilogue is scheduled for December 6, and if no deal is reached, there would only be a few months of negotiating time left before the European Parliament dissolves ahead of elections in June.