Currently, preliminary work is underway in Poland to align local laws with the requirements of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act). In recent weeks, the Ministry of Digital Affairs has conducted pre-consultations for this purpose, focusing on gathering opinions on four issues:
1. Should the implementation of the AI Act result in the creation of a completely new market surveillance authority, or should this function be performed by currently existing authority or authorities?
The majority of entities participating in the pre-consultations, including Hogan Lovells in Warsaw, expressed support for the establishment of a new authority, emphasizing the necessity of providing the appropriate infrastructure, technical, financial, and human resources essential for effectively carrying out the tasks assigned under the AI Act.
However, a minority of respondents noted that the competencies of the market surveillance authority could be entrusted to an already existing institution, such as, in particular, the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, the President of the Office for Personal Data Protection, the Chairman of the Financial Supervision Commission, the Chairman of the National Broadcasting Council, the President of the Office of Electronic Communications, or the Minister of Digital Affairs.
2. Should the function of the notifying authority be performed by an existing public authority or authorities, or by a newly established authorities created for this purpose?
The responses of the pre-consultation participants were divided. A slight majority, including Hogan Lovells in Warsaw, believed that for the development of the artificial intelligence sector in Poland, it would be more beneficial to assign the function of the notifying authority to a new authority. At the same time, a significant number of pre-consultation participants felt that these tasks could be carried out by existing entities. Among the existing institutions, the Polish Centre for Accreditation was most frequently mentioned by respondents as a potential notifying authority.
3. Should the functions of the market surveillance authority and the notifying authority be carried out by the same institution or by independent authorities?
A slight majority of pre-consultation participants believed that it would be better if the functions of the market surveillance authority and the notifying authority were performed by the same institution in Poland.
Hogan Lovells in Warsaw held the opposite position, arguing that the functions of the market surveillance authority and the notifying authority should be entrusted to independent bodies.
4. Who, e.g., authorities, institutions, organizations, enterprises, social groups, categories of citizens, etc. should be treated as a priority in terms of communication and educational activities related to the implementation of the AI Act?
In this regard, the focus of the respondents was primarily on entities such as businesses, including high-risk AI providers, public administration, researchers and students, consumers, creators and artists, financial sector institutions, and healthcare representatives.
In the coming months, further consultations are planned regarding the implementation of appropriate AI regulations in Poland.
The Ministry of Digital Affairs has established a Working Group on Artificial Intelligence (GRAI) aimed at identifying actions to ensure appropriate conditions for the development of AI applications in Poland. Hogan Lovells in Warsaw is actively participating in GRAI.
If you are interested in specific topics summarised in this article, please contact us.
Authored by Aleksandra Kuc-Makulska, and Weronika Olszewska
