The Artificial Intelligence Act is the first law of its kind in the world, designed to comprehensively regulate the development and application of AI. The EU regulation requires member states to adapt their legal systems to effectively implement the new rules in practice. The Ministry of Digital Affairs has just concluded pre-consultations for the proposed implementation of the AI Act, with 50 entities participating.
“Our priority is to introduce legislation that is precise, concrete, and clear. Hence, our focus is on dialogue with non-governmental organizations, academic institutions, and business associations,” says Deputy Minister of Digital Affairs Dariusz Standerski. “Their input will help us create a user-friendly AI ecosystem. Today, we are designing solutions for many years to come. Their universality and adaptability to rapid technological changes will be crucial. I thank all participants of the pre-consultations for their valuable opinions and recommendations, which will help us diligently incorporate the act into the Polish legal system and wisely and responsibly develop the Polish AI sector,” he adds.
The pre-consultations focused on four key issues: the establishment of a new supervisory body, determining who should perform the function of the notifying authority, whether this should be the same institution or independent categories of stakeholders (e.g., authorities, institutions, organizations, enterprises, social groups, categories of citizens), and who should be prioritized in communication and educational activities related to the implementation of the European regulation.
Participants of the pre-consultations propose establishing a new market supervisory body. The vast majority of opinions suggested creating a new supervisory body for the AI market.
This body would:
- Serve as a single point of contact for the general public and other partners at both the member state and EU levels.
- Review applications for authorizing high-risk AI systems and handle complaints from individuals affected by such systems.
- Receive reports of serious incidents.
- Collaborate with the Commission, advisory forum, and AI Council.
The market supervisory body, according to the Act, is to exercise its powers independently, impartially, and without bias.
Proponents of establishing a new body highlight several key arguments. They believe that existing institutions lack the appropriate competencies and resources. Additionally, they argue that creating a specialized agency responsible for the safe and legal development of AI will benefit both the public and private sectors. Furthermore, they claim that establishing a new body will help avoid potential competency disputes and conflicts of priorities among other institutions.
A minority of respondents believe that the supervisory body’s responsibilities should be assigned to an existing institution. In this context, entities such as the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK), the President of the Personal Data Protection Office (UODO), the Chairman of the Financial Supervision Authority (KNF), the Chairman of the National Broadcasting Council (KRRiTV), the President of the Electronic Communications Office (UKE), or the Minister of Digital Affairs (MC) were mentioned.
There is no consensus among stakeholders regarding the notifying authority. Participants of the pre-consultations are divided on which entity should perform the function of the notifying authority. This authority is to develop and apply the necessary procedures in cooperation with EU partners to evaluate, designate, and notify conformity assessment bodies for AI systems and monitor them. In certain situations, it should also provide the Commission and member states with evidence confirming the competencies of the conformity assessment body. The notifying authority, as envisioned by the creators of the Act, should operate in a manner that guarantees high expert competence, confidentiality, impartiality, and a lack of conflicts of interest with the conformity assessment bodies.
Slightly more respondents support the idea of creating a new institution for this purpose (25 indications). Simultaneously, a significant number of participants believe that these tasks could be carried out by existing entities (19 indications). Among the existing institutions, the Polish Accreditation Center (PCA) was most frequently mentioned as a potential notifying authority.
A slight majority of those participating in the pre-consultations believe it would be better if the functions of the market supervisory body and the notifying authority were performed by the same institution in Poland (23 indications).
