A fierce debate rages in Brussels over which AI systems should be considered as “High Risk”, while the systems in Annex II of the EU AI Act have attracted less attention. Here is a guide (with infographics) on the classification of ALL “High Risk” systems in the AI Act, as well as the corresponding conformity assessment procedures.

On February 2nd, 2023, the Italian Data Protection Agency (Garante Per La Protezione Dei Dati Personali) urgently ordered a temporary limitation “on the processing of personal data relating to users in the Italian territory as performed by Luka Inc., the US-based developer and operator of Replika, in its capacity as controller of the processing of personal data that is carried out via the said app”.

On December 16, 2022, Katia Bouslimani successfully defended her PhD Thesis entitled “Consent in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)” in front of a Jury composed of Professors Brunessen Bertrand, Gloria González Fuster, Celia Zolynski, Peter Swire and Jean-Michel Bruguière and the supervisors of the PhD Thesis Karine Bannelier and Theodore Christakis.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the U.S. Department of Commerce released, on January 26, 2023, the AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0.) in collaboration with the private and public sectors.

Data is the fuel of AI systems. Anonymisation has been presented as a panacea to protect personal data while enabling AI innovation. However, the growing efficiency of re-identification attacks on anonymised data raises a series of legal questions. 

On November 23rd, 2022 an article by Le Parisien, a French Newspaper, revealed that the French Government had dropped its project to deploy facial recognition to support security arrangements at the 2024 Paris Olympics. In fact, the debate on the possible implementation of facial recognition systems during the Olympic Games is part of a broader debate which divides political leaders on whether AI-driven biometric systems should be used to monitor public places.

The purpose of the Convention is to ensure that during their lifecycle, AI systems fully comply with human rights, respect the functioning of democracy and observe the rule of law, regardless of whether these activities are undertaken by public or private actors. The design, development and application of AI systems used for purposes related to national defence are expressly excluded from the scope of this Convention. The negotiators seem to agree that such a Convention must be seen first and foremost as a broad framework which might be supplemented by further obligations in more specific fields.

On December 8th, 2022, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) published a report on algorithm biases, in particular when used for predictive policing and offensive speech detection.

The use of facial recognition technologies for criminal investigation purposes has been under the spotlight for many years in France and in the European Union. In this article accepted for publication in the European Review of Digital Administration & Law, T. Christakis & A. Lodie discuss a major decision issued last year by the French Conseil d’Etat.

AI-Regulation Researchers propose a highly interesting comparative approach of the definition of different categories of “data”, including “sensitive” and “biometric” data, as found in more than 20 international instruments. Karine Bannelier and Anaïs Trotry decided to proceed to a comparative analysis of all relevant international instruments and to compile, in two Charts, the definitions appearing in these instruments. You can download the Charts and read their first findings in this article. 

On December 15th, 2022, the European Union adopted an interinstitutional declaration on digital rights and principles that will guide the EU’s ambition to be “digitally sovereign in an open and interconnected world, and to pursue digital policies that empower people and businesses to seize a human centred, sustainable and more prosperous digital future”.

On December 6th, 2022, EU Member States voted on a “general approach” to the upcoming Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act). On the same day, 192 civil society organisations and individuals published an open letter calling on the EU to modify a number of aspects of the AI Act to protect migrants from the risks that AI systems may pose to their fundamental rights.