11 Amendments of Daniel BUDA related to 2021/0106(COD)
Amendment 313 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The purpose of this Regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a harmonised, balanced and uniform legal framework in particular for the development, marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with the Union value’s fundamental values, principles, objectives and rights. This Regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest, such as a high level of protection of health, safety and fundamental rights, and it ensures the free movement of AI- based goods and services cross-border, thus preventing Member States from imposing restrictions on the development, marketing and use of AI systems, unless explicitly authorised by this Regulation.
Amendment 316 #
(1a) This Regulation strongly reaffirms the EU’s status as a technology leader and provides the legal mechanisms needed to capitalise on the use of artificial intelligence by guaranteeing positive social and environmental benefits, on the one hand, and essential competitive advantages for Europe’s businesses and economy, on the other.
Amendment 317 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Artificial intelligence systems (AI systems) can be easily deployed in multiple sectors of the economy and society, including cross border, and circulate throughout the Union, affecting various activities in areas such as climate change, finance, transport, agriculture, the environment, health, the public sector, internal affairs, quality of life, etc. Certain Member States have already explored the adoption of national rules to ensure that artificial intelligence is safe and is developed and used in compliance with fundamental rights obligations. Differing national rules that are not harmonised may lead to fragmentation of the internal market and decrease legal certainty for operators that develop or use AI systems, as well as for private users and direct or indirect beneficiaries of the various AI systems. A consistent, harmonised and high level of protection throughout the Union should therefore be ensured, while divergences hampering the free circulation of AI systems and related products and services within the internal market should be prevented, by laying down uniform, clear and transparent obligations for operators and guaranteeing the uniform and proportionate protection of overriding reasons of public interest and of rights of persons throughout the internal market based on Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). To the extent that this Regulation contains specific rules on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data concerning restrictions of the use of AI systems for ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement, it is appropriate to base this Regulation, in as far as those specific rules are concerned, on Article 16 of the TFEU. In light of those specific rules and the recourse to Article 16 TFEU, it is appropriate to consult the European Data Protection Board.
Amendment 331 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The notion of biometric data used in this Regulation is in line with and should be applied and interpreted consistently with the notion of biometric data as defined in Article 4(14) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council35 , Article 3(18) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council36 and Article 3(13) of Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 . _________________ 35 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 36 Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and Decision No 1247/2002/EC (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 39). 37 Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA (Law Enforcement Directive) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89).
Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In order to ensure a level playing fieldbalanced approach in a climate of legal certainty in the European market, a level playing field for European businesses and an effective protection of rights and freedoms of individuals across the Union, the rules established by this Regulation should apply to providers of AI systems in a non- discriminatory manner, irrespective of whether they are established within the Union or in a third country, and to users of AI systems established within the Union.
Amendment 358 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Each use of a ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification system in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to an express and, specific and, in principle, prior authorisation by a judicial authority or by an competent independent administrative authority of a Member State. Such authorisation should in principle be obtained prior to the use, except in duly justified situations of demonstrable urgency, that is, situations where the need to use the systems in question is such as to make it effectively and objectively impossible to obtain an authorisation before commencing the use. In such situations of urgency, the use should be proportionate, be restricted to the absolute minimum necessary and be subject to appropriate safeguards and conditions, as determined in national law and specified in the context of each individual urgent use case by the competent law enforcement authority itself. In addition, the competent law enforcement authority should in such situations seek to obtain an authorisation as soon as possible, whilst providing the reasons for not having been able to request it earlier and the grounds for its use.
Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) To mitigate the risks from high-risk AI systems placed or otherwise put into service on the Union market for users and affected persons, certain mandatory requirements should apply proportionately, taking into account the intended purpose of the use of the system and according to the risk management system to be established in a clear and accessible manner by the provider.
Amendment 400 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) High-risk AI systems should perform consistently throughout their lifecycle and meet an appropriate level of accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity in accordance with the generally acknowledged state of the art. The level of accuracy and accuracy metrics should be communicated to the users. Where applicable, changes in the level of accuracy and accuracy metrics should also be communicated to the users.
Amendment 405 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Given the nature of AI systems and the risks to safety and fundamental rights possibly associated with their use, including as regards the need to ensure proper monitoring of the performance of an AI system in a real-life setting, it is appropriate to set specific responsibilities as regards clarity and accessibility for users. Users should in particular use high- risk AI systems in accordance with the accessible and clear instructions of use and certain other obligations should be provided for and communicated with regard to monitoring of the functioning of the AI systems and with regard to record- keeping, as appropriate.
Amendment 448 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) importers and distributors of AI systems;
Amendment 580 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73, after consulting stakeholders and carrying out an impact study, to update the list in Annex III by adding high- risk AI systems where both of the following conditions are fulfilled: