Digital Rights Groups Urge EU to Implement AI Act According to Schedule
A coalition of 31 digital rights organizations has called on the European Commission to adhere to the planned timeline for the implementation of the AI Act. This open letter, released recently, arises from concerns that many of the 27 EU member states have failed to meet the deadline for enacting the rulebook by designating a national regulator.
The letter specifically highlights Hungary, which has gone so far as to introduce legislation permitting the use of facial recognition technology to monitor Pride events—a use case that legal experts assert is prohibited under the AI Act.
Implications of Delays
The lack of responsiveness from the Commission has reportedly contributed to hesitation among national governments in implementing the AI rulebook. The coalition, which includes prominent organizations such as European Digital Rights (EDRi), Algorithm Watch, and AccessNow, warns that further delays threaten to undermine both the protection of individuals’ rights under the AI Act and the EU’s credibility as a leader in rights-respecting AI regulation.
In their letter addressed to Henna Virkkunen, the Commission’s executive vice-president for Tech Sovereignty, Security, and Democracy, the groups emphasized the urgent need for timely implementation.
Concerns Over Implementation Schedule
The impending deadline for designating national competent authorities is seen as a troubling sign for the AI Act’s implementation schedule. Stakeholders in the private sector and lawmakers alike have been advocating for a “stop the clock” approach to pause the implementation process. This pause is being sought to address the uncertainties stemming from the complex nature of the regulation.
Recently, former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi joined the chorus of EU lawmakers calling for the postponement of the Act’s rollout.
Commission’s Stance
Despite these calls for delay, the messaging from the Commission has been inconsistent. In June, Virkkunen stated that postponing certain elements of the AI Act was not off the table. However, more recently, a Commission official commented that a “stop the clock” option is not being considered. Yvo Volman, director for data at the Commission, assured during a session with the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs (LIBE) that there would be no overall moratorium on the AI Act.
The Commission is also not contemplating a complete overhaul of the AI Act, even amidst the EU’s Digital Omnibus consultation aimed at simplifying compliance concerning data, AI, and cybersecurity. This simplification package is expected to be released in December.
Conclusion
The call for timely implementation of the AI Act by digital rights organizations underscores the critical need for effective governance in AI technology, especially as it intersects with issues of privacy and civil liberties. The ongoing discussions and negotiations within the EU will significantly shape the future of AI regulation in Europe.
