Text · Amendment list
Institutional aspects of artificial intelligence in the context of European integration
Document AFCO-AM-787899 · 2025/2118(INI)
- Kind
- Amendment list AFCO-AM-787899
- Date
- 29 April 2026
- Committee
- Committee on Constitutional Affairs
- Dossier
- 2025-2118
More facts (2)
- Formats
- Official page PDF Word
- Reference
- 2025/2118(INI)
Text
The text as parsed from the official Word file. Every paragraph has a link (¶) and can be saved to a project as a passage.
Jump to an amendment (180)
- Amendment 1
- Amendment 2
- Amendment 3
- Amendment 4
- Amendment 5
- Amendment 6
- Amendment 7
- Amendment 8
- Amendment 9
- Amendment 10
- Amendment 11
- Amendment 12
- Amendment 13
- Amendment 14
- Amendment 15
- Amendment 16
- Amendment 17
- Amendment 18
- Amendment 19
- Amendment 20
- Amendment 21
- Amendment 22
- Amendment 23
- Amendment 24
- Amendment 25
- Amendment 26
- Amendment 27
- Amendment 28
- Amendment 29
- Amendment 30
- Amendment 31
- Amendment 32
- Amendment 33
- Amendment 34
- Amendment 35
- Amendment 36
- Amendment 37
- Amendment 38
- Amendment 39
- Amendment 40
- Amendment 41
- Amendment 42
- Amendment 43
- Amendment 44
- Amendment 45
- Amendment 46
- Amendment 47
- Amendment 48
- Amendment 49
- Amendment 50
- Amendment 51
- Amendment 52
- Amendment 53
- Amendment 54
- Amendment 55
- Amendment 56
- Amendment 57
- Amendment 58
- Amendment 59
- Amendment 60
- Amendment 61
- Amendment 62
- Amendment 63
- Amendment 64
- Amendment 65
- Amendment 66
- Amendment 67
- Amendment 68
- Amendment 69
- Amendment 70
- Amendment 71
- Amendment 72
- Amendment 73
- Amendment 74
- Amendment 75
- Amendment 76
- Amendment 77
- Amendment 78
- Amendment 79
- Amendment 80
- Amendment 81
- Amendment 82
- Amendment 83
- Amendment 84
- Amendment 85
- Amendment 86
- Amendment 87
- Amendment 88
- Amendment 89
- Amendment 90
- Amendment 91
- Amendment 92
- Amendment 93
- Amendment 94
- Amendment 95
- Amendment 96
- Amendment 97
- Amendment 98
- Amendment 99
- Amendment 100
- Amendment 101
- Amendment 102
- Amendment 103
- Amendment 104
- Amendment 105
- Amendment 106
- Amendment 107
- Amendment 108
- Amendment 109
- Amendment 110
- Amendment 111
- Amendment 112
- Amendment 113
- Amendment 114
- Amendment 115
- Amendment 116
- Amendment 117
- Amendment 118
- Amendment 119
- Amendment 120
- Amendment 121
- Amendment 122
- Amendment 123
- Amendment 124
- Amendment 125
- Amendment 126
- Amendment 127
- Amendment 128
- Amendment 129
- Amendment 130
- Amendment 131
- Amendment 132
- Amendment 133
- Amendment 134
- Amendment 135
- Amendment 136
- Amendment 137
- Amendment 138
- Amendment 139
- Amendment 140
- Amendment 141
- Amendment 142
- Amendment 143
- Amendment 144
- Amendment 145
- Amendment 146
- Amendment 147
- Amendment 148
- Amendment 149
- Amendment 150
- Amendment 151
- Amendment 152
- Amendment 153
- Amendment 154
- Amendment 155
- Amendment 156
- Amendment 157
- Amendment 158
- Amendment 159
- Amendment 160
- Amendment 161
- Amendment 162
- Amendment 163
- Amendment 164
- Amendment 165
- Amendment 166
- Amendment 167
- Amendment 168
- Amendment 169
- Amendment 170
- Amendment 171
- Amendment 172
- Amendment 173
- Amendment 174
- Amendment 175
- Amendment 176
- Amendment 177
- Amendment 178
- Amendment 179
- Amendment 180
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, | – having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the European Pillar of Social Rights, the European Social Charter and the European Convention on Human Rights, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Commission’s November 2025 communication on the European Democracy Shield, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Working Document published by the European Parliament’s EUDS special committee on 29 April 2025, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and human rights, democracy and the rule of law (Vilnius Declaration), |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the European Declaration on Digital Rights and Principles for the Digital Decade, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the UN General Assembly Resolution of 21 March 2024 on ‘Seizing the Opportunities of Safe, Secure and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence Systems for Sustainable Development’, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the OECD Principles on Artificial Intelligence, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A. whereas Article 2 TEU addresses the EU’s constitutional identity and legitimises Parliament’s scrutiny of artificial intelligence (AI) where its deployment may affect core values; | A. whereas Article 2 TEU outlines the core values of the EU’s constitutional identity and legitimises Parliament’s scrutiny of artificial intelligence (AI) where its deployment may affect core values, including democracy, equality, human dignity, social justice, non-discrimination and the protection of fundamental rights; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A. whereas Article 2 TEU addresses the EU’s constitutional identity and legitimises Parliament’s scrutiny of artificial intelligence (AI) where its deployment may affect core values; | A. whereas Article 2 TEU addresses the EU’s constitutional identity and legitimises Parliament’s scrutiny of artificial intelligence (AI) where its deployment may affect core values as well as the Union’s strategic sovereignty; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B. whereas in accordance with Articles 10, 11 and 14 TEU, Parliament bears a specific responsibility to ensure democratic accountability, transparency and effective scrutiny of technological developments affecting the functioning of the EU’s institutions; whereas the safe, ethical and lawful development and deployment of AI require robust governance frameworks grounded in the EU Treaties; | B. whereas in accordance with Articles 10, 11 and 14 TEU, Parliament bears a specific responsibility to ensure democratic accountability, transparency and effective scrutiny of technological developments affecting the functioning of the EU’s institutions; whereas the transformative impact of AI requires Parliament to ensure that technological development strengthens democratic participation, safeguards vulnerable groups, and prevents the reproduction of structural inequalities; whereas the safe, ethical and lawful development and deployment of AI require robust governance and regulatory frameworks grounded in the EU Treaties and the EU acquis, including mandatory transparency obligations, public-interest audits, and enforceable individual rights; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B. whereas in accordance with Articles 10, 11 and 14 TEU, Parliament bears a specific responsibility to ensure democratic accountability, transparency and effective scrutiny of technological developments affecting the functioning of the EU’s institutions; whereas the safe, ethical and lawful development and deployment of AI require robust governance frameworks grounded in the EU Treaties; | B. whereas in accordance with Articles 10, 11 and 14 TEU, Parliament bears a specific responsibility to ensure democratic accountability, transparency and effective scrutiny of technological developments affecting the functioning of the EU’s institutions; whereas the safe, ethical and lawful development and deployment of any technology, particularly AI require robust governance frameworks grounded in the EU Treaties; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B a. whereas the Parliament, first and foremost, must continue to develop and adopt its own internal regulatory framework for the proper use of AI by its services; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C. whereas the Artificial Intelligence Actintroduces the world’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for AI; whereas AI is advancing at an unprecedented pace, reshaping economic activity, public administration and societal interactions; | C. whereas the Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) introduces the world’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for AI; whereas the full implementation of the AI Act is a decisive factor for the EU’s digital sovereignty as well as for the preservationprotection of its democratic processes and the protection of its citizens’ fundamental rights and personal data; whereas AI is advancing at an unprecedented pace, reshaping economic activity, public administration and societal interactions and profoundly affecting labour markets and working conditions; whereas the Union must ensure that AI-driven transformation does not exacerbate social and economic inequalities or undermine social justice and inclusiveness; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C. whereas the Artificial Intelligence Actintroduces the world’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for AI; whereas AI is advancing at an unprecedented pace, reshaping economic activity, public administration and societal interactions; | C. whereas the Artificial Intelligence Act introduces the world’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for AI; whereas AI is advancing at an unprecedented pace, mostly outside of the EU, reshaping economic activity, public administration and societal interactions; whereas having EU-grown, competitive technological capacity, particularly in the area of AI and LLMs is paramount for the EU’s strategic sovereignty and democratic integrity; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C. whereas the Artificial Intelligence Actintroduces the world’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for AI; whereas AI is advancing at an unprecedented pace, reshaping economic activity, public administration and societal interactions; | C. whereas the Artificial Intelligence Actintroduces the world’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for AI; whereas AI is advancing at an unprecedented pace, reshaping economic activity, public administration and societal interactions, including labour markets and working conditions, which requires particular attention to social fairness and workers’ rights; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C. whereas the Artificial Intelligence Actintroduces the world’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for AI; whereas AI is advancing at an unprecedented pace, reshaping economic activity, public administration and societal interactions; | C. whereas the Artificial Intelligence Actintroduces the world’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for AI; whereas AI is advancing at an unprecedented pace, reshaping economic and professional activity, public administration and societal interactions; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C a. whereas the use of AI has direct implications for the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms, including the freedom of thought and conscience, freedom of expression, the right to privacy, data protection, non-discrimination and the right to good administration; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas the UN Global Digital Compact calls for strengthened international cooperation on the governance of AI and highlights the role of global forums in facilitating dialogue on the societal and ethical implications of AI; | D. whereas the UN Global Digital Compact calls for strengthened international cooperation on the governance of AI and highlights the role of global forums in facilitating dialogue on the societal and ethical implications of AI, including the need to ensure that technological development contributes to social progress, reduces inequalities and fully respects fundamental rights; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas the UN Global Digital Compact calls for strengthened international cooperation on the governance of AI and highlights the role of global forums in facilitating dialogue on the societal and ethical implications of AI; | D. whereas the UN Global Digital Compact calls for strengthened international cooperation on the governance of AI and highlights the role of global fora in facilitating dialogue on the societal and ethical implications of AI; whereas global governance, along with ambitious regulatory frameworks, are necessary to ensure safe, ethical and human-centred deployment of AI worldwide; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas international cooperation on AI must prevent digital extractivism, ensure equitable access to technological benefits and address the concentration of power in a small number of private actors; whereas global governance and regulatory frameworks should also encompass the significant and constantly increasing ecological footprint of AI development and deployment, driven by immense electricity demand, heavy water consumption and hardware-related e-waste; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas the Vilnius Declaration underlines that artificial intelligence governance must be human-centric, grounded in fundamental rights, democratic accountability and the rule of law; whereas it stresses the importance of transparency, public oversight and safeguards against discrimination, bias and social inequalities, particularly in the use of AI in the public sector; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| E. whereas Parliament, as the EU’s representative democratic institution, has a legitimate role in contributing to such global discussions, in line with Articles 10, 11 and 13 TEU, and a responsibility to safeguard democratic accountability and institutional coherence in the EU’s external engagement; | E. whereas Parliament, as the EU’s representative democratic institution, has a legitimate role in contributing to such global discussions, in line with Articles 10, 11 and 13 TEU; whereas Parliament bears a responsibility to ensure that international AI governance protects democratic values, social justice, human rights, personal data and human dignity; whereas Parliament’s engagement in global discussions should safeguard and prioritise the integrity of public debate, transparency, inclusiveness and democratic accountability in global digital rule-making and institutional coherence in the EU’s external engagement; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| G. whereas the Council conclusions of 20 November 2025 on advancing the International Digital Strategy for the European Union emphasise that digital policy and AI policy have become core components of the EU’s external action; | G. whereas the Council conclusions of 20 November 2025 on advancing the International Digital Strategy for the European Union emphasise that digital policy and AI policy have become core components of the EU’s external action; whereas the Union’s external AI engagement must avoid reinforcing global asymmetries, prevent digital extractivism and ensure that technological cooperation promotes fair, inclusive and sustainable development; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| G. whereas the Council conclusions of 20 November 2025 on advancing the International Digital Strategy for the European Union emphasise that digital policy and AI policy have become core components of the EU’s external action; | G. whereas the Council conclusions of 20 November 2025 on advancing the International Digital Strategy for the European Union emphasise that digital policy and AI policy have become core components of the EU’s external action, according to the rules-based global order and to the defence of its fundamental values; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| H. whereas monitoring global AI developments at EU level, in close cooperation with the Commission’s AI Office, the European Artificial Intelligence Board (AI Board) and the national competent authorities, monitoring developments in the Member States, maintaining regular exchanges with national parliaments, and identifying potential cross-sectoral overlaps and gaps in the EU’s legal framework for AI will be of utmost importance; whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory should play a central role in this regard; | H. whereas monitoring global AI developments at EU level, in close cooperation with the Commission’s AI Office, the European Artificial Intelligence Board (AI Board) and the national competent authorities, monitoring developments in the Member States, maintaining regular exchanges with national parliaments, and identifying potential cross-sectoral overlaps and gaps in the EU’s legal framework for AI will be of utmost importance; whereas, building on the outcomes of the recent Interparliamentary Committee Meetings (ICM) on AI with national parliaments that discussed AI more broadly, the establishment of a regular exchange of policy approaches and best practices with national parliaments would further strengthen interparliamentary cooperation in this area; whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory should play a central role in this regard, including by coordinating and supporting such exchanges; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| H. whereas monitoring global AI developments at EU level, in close cooperation with the Commission’s AI Office, the European Artificial Intelligence Board (AI Board) and the national competent authorities, monitoring developments in the Member States, maintaining regular exchanges with national parliaments, and identifying potential cross-sectoral overlaps and gaps in the EU’s legal framework for AI will be of utmost importance; whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory should play a central role in this regard; | H. whereas monitoring global AI developments at EU level, in close cooperation with the Commission’s AI Office, the European Artificial Intelligence Board and the national competent authorities, as well as maintaining regular exchanges with national parliaments, and identifying potential cross-sectoral overlaps, gaps and inconsistencies in the Union’s evolving legal framework for AI, will be of utmost importance; whereas such analytical and coordination functions within the Parliament should, where appropriate, be further developed in a proportionate and cost-efficient manner, building on existing structures and expertise; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| H. whereas monitoring global AI developments at EU level, in close cooperation with the Commission’s AI Office, the European Artificial Intelligence Board (AI Board) and the national competent authorities, monitoring developments in the Member States, maintaining regular exchanges with national parliaments, and identifying potential cross-sectoral overlaps and gaps in the EU’s legal framework for AI will be of utmost importance; whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory should play a central role in this regard; | H. whereas monitoring global AI developments at EU level, in close cooperation with the EU AI Office, the European Artificial Intelligence Board (AI Board) and the national competent authorities, monitoring developments in the Member States, maintaining regular exchanges with national parliaments, and identifying potential cross-sectoral overlaps and gaps in the EU’s legal framework for AI will be of utmost importance; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| H. whereas monitoring global AI developments at EU level, in close cooperation with the Commission’s AI Office, the European Artificial Intelligence Board (AI Board) and the national competent authorities, monitoring developments in the Member States, maintaining regular exchanges with national parliaments, and identifying potential cross-sectoral overlaps and gaps in the EU’s legal framework for AI will be of utmost importance; whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory should play a central role in this regard; | H. whereas Parliament requires sufficient internal analytical capacity to assess the institutional implications of artificial intelligence for its own work, scrutiny and legislative activity; whereas any internal support structure established for that purpose should remain limited to analytical and administrative support for Parliament and its tasks, avoid duplication with the tasks of the Commission’s AI Office, the European Artificial Intelligence Board (AI Board) and national competent authorities, and fully respect the institutional balance laid down in the Treaties; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| H. whereas monitoring global AI developments at EU level, in close cooperation with the Commission’s AI Office, the European Artificial Intelligence Board (AI Board) and the national competent authorities, monitoring developments in the Member States, maintaining regular exchanges with national parliaments, and identifying potential cross-sectoral overlaps and gaps in the EU’s legal framework for AI will be of utmost importance; whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory should play a central role in this regard; | H. whereas monitoring global AI developments at EU level, in close cooperation with the Commission’s AI Office, the European Artificial Intelligence Board (AI Board), the national competent authorities, civil society, social partners and academia, monitoring developments in the Member States, maintaining regular exchanges with national parliaments, and identifying potential cross-sectoral overlaps and gaps in the EU’s legal framework for AI will be of utmost importance; whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory should play a central role in this regard; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| I. whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory would qualify as an EU body that may be invited to the meetings of the AI Board, in accordance with Article 65(2) of the Artificial Intelligence Act; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| I. whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory would qualify as an EU body that may be invited to the meetings of the AI Board, in accordance with Article 65(2) of the Artificial Intelligence Act; | I. whereas any exchanges between Parliament’s internal services and the AI Board should take place strictly within the framework established by the Artificial Intelligence Act and without altering the institutional balance or the respective competences of the institutions and the Member States; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| I. whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory would qualify as an EU body that may be invited to the meetings of the AI Board, in accordance with Article 65(2) of the Artificial Intelligence Act; | I. whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory would qualify as an EU body for the purpose of Article 65(2) of the Artificial Intelligence Act; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| I. whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory would qualify as an EU body that may be invited to the meetings of the AI Board, in accordance with Article 65(2) of the Artificial Intelligence Act; | I. whereas the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory could qualify as an EU body that may be invited to the meetings of the AI Board, in accordance with Article 65(2) of the Artificial Intelligence Act; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| I a. whereas the democratic legislative process is exclusively a human domain exercised by the elected individuals through the mandate instilled in them by the voters; whereas the legislative process requires human discretion, ethical weighing, and political compromise; whereas over-reliance on AI in this process risks introducing algorithmic bias and 'black-box' logic into the heart of Union lawmaking, which could undermine the quality and legitimacy of legislation; whereas “LLMs grooming” is often used by malicious actors to introduce bias in LLMs and sway democratic, fact-based narratives; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| J. whereas AI can support parliamentary scrutiny of the implementation and application of EU law by reducing information asymmetries and mitigating Parliament’s recurring difficulties in accessing the relevant data, as well as by contributing to the improvement of the EU’s legislative processes; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| J. whereas AI can support parliamentary scrutiny of the implementation and application of EU law by reducing information asymmetries and mitigating Parliament’s recurring difficulties in accessing the relevant data, as well as by contributing to the improvement of the EU’s legislative processes; | J. whereas AI could be further developed to support parliamentary scrutiny of the implementation and application of EU law by reducing information asymmetries and mitigating Parliament’s recurring difficulties in accessing the relevant data, as well as by contributing to the improvement of the EU’s legislative processes; whereas, at the current stage, modern large language models (LLMs) have shown significant shortcomings, including lack of accuracy, generation of baseless claims, false or fabricated references and so-called ‘AI hallucinations’; whereas these shortcomings pose significant risks to legislative quality and evidence-based policy-making; whereas possible future use of AI systems in parliamentary processes must be reliable, transparent, verifiable, auditable and subject to strict human oversight; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| J. whereas AI can support parliamentary scrutiny of the implementation and application of EU law by reducing information asymmetries and mitigating Parliament’s recurring difficulties in accessing the relevant data, as well as by contributing to the improvement of the EU’s legislative processes; | J. whereas AI, in carefully weighed and protocoled cases, could support parliamentary scrutiny of the implementation and application of EU law by reducing information asymmetries and mitigating Parliament’s recurring difficulties in accessing the relevant data, as well as by potentially contributing to the improvement of the EU’s legislative processes; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| K. whereas the rapid evolution of AI technologies requires continuous analytical capacity in order to assess their institutional, democratic and legal implications for the functioning of the EU; whereas Parliament should therefore strengthen its internal expertise and monitoring capacities in this field; | K. whereas the rapid evolution of AI technologies requires continuous analytical capacity in order to assess their institutional, democratic and legal implications for the functioning of the EU; whereas Parliament should therefore strengthen its internal expertise and monitoring capacities in this field in cooperation with other EU and European institutions as well as with the EU candidate and potential candidate countries; whereas there should be no doubling or fragmentation of capabilities in this area; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| K. whereas the rapid evolution of AI technologies requires continuous analytical capacity in order to assess their institutional, democratic and legal implications for the functioning of the EU; whereas Parliament should therefore strengthen its internal expertise and monitoring capacities in this field; | K. whereas the rapid evolution of AI technologies requires continuous analytical capacity in order to assess their institutional, democratic and legal implications for the functioning of the EU; whereas Parliament should therefore strengthen its internal expertise and monitoring capacities in this field, developing a coherent institutional strategy and building institutional memory to anticipate systemic risks and governance challenges; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| K. whereas the rapid evolution of AI technologies requires continuous analytical capacity in order to assess their institutional, democratic and legal implications for the functioning of the EU; whereas Parliament should therefore strengthen its internal expertise and monitoring capacities in this field; | K. whereas the rapid evolution of AI technologies requires continuous analytical capacity in order to assess their institutional, democratic and legal implications for the functioning of the EU; whereas Parliament should therefore strengthen its internal expertise and monitoring and verification capacities in this field; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming electoral campaigning and political communication; whereas such technologies may interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections; | L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming electoral campaigning and political communication; whereas such technologies may interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections and may also offer technical solutions to help streamline these processes; whereas permitted use of AI for electoral processes should prioritise European AI models that demonstrate data and algorithmic transparency and operate using European data infrastructure not susceptible to laws and influence of third countries; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming electoral campaigning and political communication; whereas such technologies may interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections; | L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming electoral campaigning and political communication; considering that AI drastically lowers barriers for malicious interference, enabling non-state actors to conduct sophisticated manipulation campaigns at unprecedented scale and speed; whereas such technologies may interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming electoral campaigning and political communication; whereas such technologies may interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections; | L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming public debate, electoral campaigning and political communication; whereas such technologies interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections; whereas these developments require urgent enforceable safeguards to protect democratic participation, free political choice and fair political competition; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming electoral campaigning and political communication; whereas such technologies may interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections; | L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming electoral campaigning, political communication, and the wider media landscape; whereas such technologies have been used by malicious actors both from within and outside the Union as a means to interfer with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming electoral campaigning and political communication; whereas such technologies may interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections; | L. whereas the use of artificial intelligence in the electoral context may give rise to specific challenges, including deceptive impersonation, falsification of identity, or other unlawful practices; whereas any response must remain consistent with freedom of expression, political pluralism, the limited harmonisation of the European electoral framework and the competences of the Member States; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming electoral campaigning and political communication; whereas such technologies may interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections; | L. whereas the rapid deployment of AI technologies is profoundly transforming electoral campaigning and political communication; whereas such technologies may interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, including in the context of European elections, notably through disinformation, deepfakes, microtargeting and manipulation of voters; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| L a. whereas, in sensitive areas such as the justice system, the nature of judicial decision-making involves the interpretation of the law, the assessment of evidence, the exercise of judgment, and the assumption of individual responsibility by the judge - elements that cannot be reduced to algorithmic data processing; whereas the use of AI systems in this context poses significant risks to judicial independence, the right to a fair trial, and public trust in the administration of justice; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| M. whereas to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging AI challenges, structured and inclusive reflection on possible Treaty reform may be necessary in the medium to long term; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| M. whereas to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging AI challenges, structured and inclusive reflection on possible Treaty reform may be necessary in the medium to long term; | M. whereas to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging AI challenges, structured and inclusive reflection on possible Treaty reform may be necessary in the medium to long term in order to ensure that the Union’s constitutional framework is capable of addressing the profound democratic, societal and economic transformations driven by AI; whereas Treaty evolution should reinforce social justice, equality, environmental sustainability and the protection of fundamental rights in the digital age; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| M. whereas to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging AI challenges, structured and inclusive reflection on possible Treaty reform may be necessary in the medium to long term; | M. whereas, to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent and democratically legitimate and is capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges linked to artificial intelligence, it is appropriate to undertake a structured, inclusive and evidence-based assessment of existing institutional and legal arrangements in the medium to long term, fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| M. whereas to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging AI challenges, structured and inclusive reflection on possible Treaty reform may be necessary in the medium to long term; | M. whereas to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging AI challenges, structured and inclusive Treaty reform is necessary; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| M. whereas to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging AI challenges, structured and inclusive reflection on possible Treaty reform may be necessary in the medium to long term; | M. whereas to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging AI challenges and opportunities, Treaty reform is more necessary than ever; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| M a. whereas emerging technological developments should be assessed in the light of the existing Treaties, with full respect for conferral, subsidiarity, proportionality and the constitutional identities of the Member States; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that AI governance is not solely a matter of technical regulation, but also a matter of constitutional applicability, affecting the exercise of public authority, democratic legitimacy and the EU’s institutional balance as defined in Article 13 TEU, and therefore requiring sustained parliamentary scrutiny within the scope of Parliament’s competence; | 1. Stresses that AI governance is not solely a matter of technical regulation, but also a matter of constitutional applicability, affecting the exercise of public authority, democratic legitimacy and the EU’s institutional balance as defined in Article 13 TEU; underlines, therefore, that, in addition to solid European and national regulatory frameworks, it requires robust and sustained parliamentary scrutiny, within the scope of Parliament’s competences and with full respect to Parliament’s prerogatives as a co-legislator, to guarantee that AI does not undermine the Union’s values and democratic processes; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that AI governance is not solely a matter of technical regulation, but also a matter of constitutional applicability, affecting the exercise of public authority, democratic legitimacy and the EU’s institutional balance as defined in Article 13 TEU, and therefore requiring sustained parliamentary scrutiny within the scope of Parliament’s competence; | 1. Stresses that AI governance is not solely a matter of technical regulation, but also a matter of constitutional applicability, affecting the exercise of public authority, democratic legitimacy and the EU’s institutional balance as defined in Article 13 TEU, and therefore requiring sustained parliamentary scrutiny within the scope of Parliament’s competence, including full respect for Parliament’s prerogatives as co-legislator and budgetary authority; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that AI governance is not solely a matter of technical regulation, but also a matter of constitutional applicability, affecting the exercise of public authority, democratic legitimacy and the EU’s institutional balance as defined in Article 13 TEU, and therefore requiring sustained parliamentary scrutiny within the scope of Parliament’s competence; | 1. Stresses that the deployment of artificial intelligence may raise institutional, administrative and legal questions relevant to the exercise of Parliament’s scrutiny functions within the limits of the competences conferred on the Union by the Treaties; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that AI governance is not solely a matter of technical regulation, but also a matter of constitutional applicability, affecting the exercise of public authority, democratic legitimacy and the EU’s institutional balance as defined in Article 13 TEU, and therefore requiring sustained parliamentary scrutiny within the scope of Parliament’s competence; | 1. Stresses that AI governance is not solely a matter of technical regulation, but also a matter of constitutional applicability, affecting the exercise of public authority, democratic legitimacy and the EU’s institutional balance as defined in Article 13 TEU, as well as a matter of EU strategic sovereignty, and therefore requiring sustained parliamentary scrutiny within the scope of Parliament’s competence; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1 a. insists that the democratic principle of a "human decision-maker" must be upheld in all situations as a core of EU institutional law and democracy to prevent the gradual and silent relinquishment of democratic mandates from elected representatives to automated systems; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Reaffirms that the EU’s approach to AI must be fully aligned with the values provided for under Article 2 TEU, including democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, and that AI deployment within institutions must remain human-centred; | 2. Reaffirms that the EU’s approach to AI must be fully aligned with the values provided for under Article 2 TEU, including democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, and that AI deployment within institutions must remain human-centred; draws attention to the need for the Commission and the co-legislators to assess how these rights should be carefully balanced among each other, notably to reasonably mitigate the extension of property rights over the overall purpose of enabling the development of AI made in the EU; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Reaffirms that the EU’s approach to AI must be fully aligned with the values provided for under Article 2 TEU, including democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, and that AI deployment within institutions must remain human-centred; | 2. Reaffirms that the EU’s approach to AI must be fully aligned with the values provided for under Article 2 TEU, including democracy, the rule of law, human dignity and fundamental rights, including protection of personal data, and that AI deployment within institutions must remain human-centred; emphasises that human-centred AI requires enforceable transparency, algorithmic accountability, public-interest audits and meaningful human oversight; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Reaffirms that the EU’s approach to AI must be fully aligned with the values provided for under Article 2 TEU, including democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, and that AI deployment within institutions must remain human-centred; | 2. Reaffirms that the EU’s approach to AI must be fully aligned with the values provided for under Article 2 TEU, including democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, as well as social justice and equality, and that AI deployment within institutions must remain human-centred, ensuring meaningful human control and oversight; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2 a. calls for the modification of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU in order to include new rights and freedoms which emerged as a consequence of the extensive use of AI, such as the right to the protection of personal identity and likeness (against deepfakes), the right to algorithmic transparency and digital self-determination and the protection from algorithmic discrimination; the principle of accountability and responsibility for potential damages should also be included in order to substantiate the afore mentioned rights and freedoms; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2 a. Points out that the EU’s policy approach to AI has a direct impact on its geostrategic position and the sovereignty of its institutions and Member States; underscores that, while an international harmonisation is indispensable, the EU must at all times pursue its own strategic interests and autonomy in both the development and the deployment of these new technologies on European soil and leverage its soft power to set an example for the global community; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council conclusions calling for stronger EU ambition, investment and cooperation in the field of AI, including with international organisations; considers that Parliament should have stronger institutional capacity to scrutinise the EU’s global engagement in AI and the implications thereof for the EU’s sovereignty and democratic accountability; | 3. Recalls the Council conclusions calling for stronger EU ambition, investment and cooperation in the field of AI, including with international organisations; considers that Parliament should have stronger institutional capacity to scrutinise the EU’s global engagement in AI, ensuring that such engagement is grounded in a human- and rights-based approach, and the implications thereof for the EU’s sovereignty and democratic accountability; stresses, moreover, that the EU’s global engagement in AI must avoid reinforcing global asymmetries, prevent digital extractivism, promote equitable access to technological benefits and ensure that technological cooperation promotes fair, inclusive and sustainable development; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council conclusions calling for stronger EU ambition, investment and cooperation in the field of AI, including with international organisations; considers that Parliament should have stronger institutional capacity to scrutinise the EU’s global engagement in AI and the implications thereof for the EU’s sovereignty and democratic accountability; | 3. Recalls the Council conclusions calling for stronger EU ambition, investment and cooperation in the field of AI, including with international organisations; considers that Parliament should have stronger institutional capacity to scrutinise the EU’s global engagement in AI and the implications thereof for the EU’s sovereignty and democratic accountability, including through enhanced access to information and regular reporting obligations by the Commission and the Council; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council conclusions calling for stronger EU ambition, investment and cooperation in the field of AI, including with international organisations; considers that Parliament should have stronger institutional capacity to scrutinise the EU’s global engagement in AI and the implications thereof for the EU’s sovereignty and democratic accountability; | 3. Recalls the Council conclusions calling for stronger EU ambition, investment and cooperation in the field of AI, including with international organisations; considers that Parliament should have sufficient capacity to scrutinise, within its competences, the implications of relevant Union action in this field for democratic accountability and institutional balance; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3 a. Commits to further develop and adopt a robust internal regulatory and ethical framework for the use of AI by its own services in order to maximise efficiency, innovation, and public value, while safeguarding fundamental rights, data protection, transparency, accountability, and human oversight within Parliament’s own functioning; points out that this internal framework should keep pace with internal regulatory approaches in other EU institutions; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Calls for a structured and regular interinstitutional dialogue between Parliament, the Commission and the Council on the institutional implications of AI; | 4. Calls for a structured and regular interinstitutional dialogue between Parliament, the Commission and the Council on the institutional implications of AI; stresses that such dialogue must address not only institutional coordination but also the risks posed by current AI systems to safeguard the integrity of the EU’s decision-making process and ensure full transparency and accountability towards citizens; calls on the Parliament to further commit to the adoption and implementation of regulations enabling the responsible development of AI in the EU, particularly with regard to public debate and democratic processes; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Calls for a structured and regular interinstitutional dialogue between Parliament, the Commission and the Council on the institutional implications of AI; | 4. Calls for a structured and regular interinstitutional coordination between Parliament, the Commission and the Council on the institutional implications of AI; points out that this coordination should facilitate the exchange of alerts, best practices and other information pertaining to AI; is of the view that this coordination should build on partnerships with academia as well as the private sector in order to facilitate the monitoring of and development of policy solutions for new technological advances; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Calls for a structured and regular interinstitutional dialogue between Parliament, the Commission and the Council on the institutional implications of AI; | 4. Calls for a structured and regular interinstitutional dialogue between Parliament, the Commission and the Council on the institutional implications of AI, ensuring full transparency and accountability towards citizens and adequate involvement of social partners and civil society; and calls for the exploration of an interinstitutional agreement to formalise such cooperation, including obligations on transparency, information-sharing and timely involvement of Parliament; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Stresses that the EU’s growing engagement in international digital and AI governance, including partnerships, multilateral initiatives and global standard-setting, has institutional implications; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Stresses that the EU’s growing engagement in international digital and AI governance, including partnerships, multilateral initiatives and global standard-setting, has institutional implications; | 5. Stresses that the EU’s growing engagement in international digital and AI governance, including partnerships, multilateral initiatives and global standard-setting, has institutional implications; in particular with a view to global risks that could stem from AI, such as in the area of cybersecurity; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Stresses that the EU’s growing engagement in international digital and AI governance, including partnerships, multilateral initiatives and global standard-setting, has institutional implications; | 5. Stresses that the EU’s growing engagement in international digital and AI governance, including partnerships, multilateral initiatives and global standard-setting, has institutional implications that require strengthened democratic oversight, transparency and accountability; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5 a. Stresses that artificial intelligence, by its scale and cross-border impact, requires effective international cooperation and coordination; underlines that, in an increasingly complex geopolitical context, the Union should promote a rules-based approach to the governance of artificial intelligence and digital technologies, based on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights; emphasises the importance of strengthening cooperation with international partners and like-minded countries in order to exchange best practices, foster regulatory interoperability and contribute to the development of a global level playing field grounded in clear and shared principles; highlights that such cooperation should build on existing international frameworks, including the OECD AI Principles and UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, while ensuring coherence with the Union’s internal legal and institutional framework; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5 a. Stresses that EU institutional sovereignty in the field of AI can only be achieved and preserved if the Union actively promotes and scales “European technology”, including by fostering a globally competitive European tech sector and the deployment of secure, interoperable and sovereign cloud infrastructures, while ensuring strategic autonomy across the entire AI value chain - from access to high-quality data and advanced computing capacity to the design, deployment and scaling of trustworthy AI systems - and by reducing critical dependencies on non-EU providers through strengthened coordination, investment and common governance among Member States; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5 b. Draws attention to recent Member State initiatives on the use of cloud services by public authorities, highlighting decisions to prioritise and make use of European cloud providers, particularly for sensitive and strategic data, in order to strengthen digital sovereignty, security and resilience; commits to launch a debate with the other institutions on the deployment of these services at EU-level as soon as possible; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6. Stresses the importance of parliamentary participation in global AI governance discussions and therefore strongly supports Parliament’s engagement in multilateral forums such as the UN annual summit ‘AI for Good’; acknowledges that by engaging globally with a clear set of values and ethical principles, Parliament is strengthening its democratic role and credibility, while fully respecting the Commission’s competences in the field and in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation, as stipulated by Article 13(2) TEU; | 6. Recognises the value of interparliamentary exchanges and dialogue on artificial intelligence in relevant international forums, provided that such participation does not blur the allocation of competences under the Treaties with regard to the Union’s external representation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6. Stresses the importance of parliamentary participation in global AI governance discussions and therefore strongly supports Parliament’s engagement in multilateral forums such as the UN annual summit ‘AI for Good’; acknowledges that by engaging globally with a clear set of values and ethical principles, Parliament is strengthening its democratic role and credibility, while fully respecting the Commission’s competences in the field and in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation, as stipulated by Article 13(2) TEU; | 6. Stresses the importance of parliamentary participation in global AI governance discussions and therefore strongly supports Parliament’s engagement in multilateral forums such as the UN annual summit ‘AI for Good’; stresses the need for the EU to speak in one voice on the international arena and the Parliament, as a directly elected co-legislator, has a mandate to lead this process; acknowledges that by engaging globally with a clear set of values and ethical principles, Parliament is strengthening its democratic role and credibility, while fully respecting the Commission’s competences in the field and in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation, as stipulated by Article 13(2) TEU; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Underlines that, in an era of strong geopolitical competition, Parliament’s participation in international forums is essential; stresses that AI practices and technologies shared externally must comply with Parliament’s commitments to transparency, sustainability, data protection and democratic oversight; emphasises, moreover, the importance of addressing systemic risks associated with AI, including the propagation of so-called hallucinations, which may undermine the accuracy and reliability of information, as well as the potential socio-economic impact of AI, notably in terms of job displacement, rather than merely promoting technological excellence; | 7. Underlines that, in an era of strong geopolitical competition, Parliament’s participation in international fora is essential; stresses that AI practices and technologies shared externally must comply with Parliament’s commitments to transparency, sustainability, data protection and democratic oversight; emphasises, moreover, the importance of addressing systemic risks associated with AI, including the propagation of deep fakes and so-called ‘AI hallucinations’, which undermine the accuracy and reliability of information, as well as the potential socio-economic impact of AI, notably in terms of job displacement and quality working conditions, rather than merely promoting technological excellence; stresses that the deployment of AI practices and technologies must be accompanied by social justice, environmental responsibility and accountability and must uphold the principles of social progress and protection of workers’ rights, ensuring that it contributes to quality employment, better working conditions, upskilling and reskilling, empowerment and well-being of all workers and citizens; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Underlines that, in an era of strong geopolitical competition, Parliament’s participation in international forums is essential; stresses that AI practices and technologies shared externally must comply with Parliament’s commitments to transparency, sustainability, data protection and democratic oversight; emphasises, moreover, the importance of addressing systemic risks associated with AI, including the propagation of so-called hallucinations, which may undermine the accuracy and reliability of information, as well as the potential socio-economic impact of AI, notably in terms of job displacement, rather than merely promoting technological excellence; | 7. Underlines that, in an era of intensifying great-power competition over AI capabilities, Parliament’s participation in international forums is essential; stresses that AI practices and technologies shared externally must comply with Parliament’s commitments to transparency, sustainability, data protection and democratic oversight; emphasises, moreover, the importance of addressing destabilising systemic risks associated with AI, including uncontrolled proliferation of advanced capabilities and loss-of-control scenarios, which may undermine the accuracy and reliability of information, as well as the potential socio-economic impact of AI, notably in terms of job displacement, rather than focusing solely on technological excellence without adequate risk governance; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Underlines that, in an era of strong geopolitical competition, Parliament’s participation in international forums is essential; stresses that AI practices and technologies shared externally must comply with Parliament’s commitments to transparency, sustainability, data protection and democratic oversight; emphasises, moreover, the importance of addressing systemic risks associated with AI, including the propagation of so-called hallucinations, which may undermine the accuracy and reliability of information, as well as the potential socio-economic impact of AI, notably in terms of job displacement, rather than merely promoting technological excellence; | 7. Underlines that, in an era of strong geopolitical competition, Parliament’s participation in international forums is essential; stresses that AI practices and technologies shared externally must comply with Parliament’s commitments to transparency, sustainability, data protection and democratic oversight; as well as fundamental rights, social standards and ethical principles; emphasises, moreover, the importance of addressing systemic risks associated with AI, including the propagation of so-called hallucinations, which may undermine the accuracy and reliability of information, as well as the potential socio-economic impact of AI, notably in terms of job displacement, rather than merely promoting technological excellence; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Underlines that, in an era of strong geopolitical competition, Parliament’s participation in international forums is essential; stresses that AI practices and technologies shared externally must comply with Parliament’s commitments to transparency, sustainability, data protection and democratic oversight; emphasises, moreover, the importance of addressing systemic risks associated with AI, including the propagation of so-called hallucinations, which may undermine the accuracy and reliability of information, as well as the potential socio-economic impact of AI, notably in terms of job displacement, rather than merely promoting technological excellence; | 7. Underlines that, in an era of strong geopolitical competition, Parliament’s participation in international forums is essential; stresses that AI practices and technologies shared externally must comply with Parliament’s commitments to transparency, sustainability, data protection and democratic oversight; emphasises, moreover, the importance of addressing systemic risks associated with AI, including biased algorithms, foreign interference, the propagation of so-called hallucinations, which may undermine the accuracy and reliability of information, as well as the potential socio-economic impact of AI, notably in terms of job displacement, rather than merely promoting technological excellence; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Underlines that, in an era of strong geopolitical competition, Parliament’s participation in international forums is essential; stresses that AI practices and technologies shared externally must comply with Parliament’s commitments to transparency, sustainability, data protection and democratic oversight; emphasises, moreover, the importance of addressing systemic risks associated with AI, including the propagation of so-called hallucinations, which may undermine the accuracy and reliability of information, as well as the potential socio-economic impact of AI, notably in terms of job displacement, rather than merely promoting technological excellence; | 7. Underlines that, given the current geopolitical situation, Parliament’s participation in international forums is essential; stresses that AI practices and positions shared externally must comply with Parliament’s commitments to transparency, sustainability, data protection and democratic oversight; emphasises, moreover, the importance of addressing systemic risks associated with AI, including the propagation of so-called hallucinations, which may undermine the accuracy and reliability of information, as well as the potential socio-economic impact of AI, notably in terms of job displacement, rather than merely promoting technological excellence; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed and cross-border impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and that, as with earlier transformative technologies, including nuclear technology in the mid-20th century, responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level; | 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed and cross-border impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and that, as with earlier transformative technologies, including nuclear technology in the mid-20th century, responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level; calls, in this context, for the adoption of an international treaty on the non-proliferation of high-risk and harmful Artificial Intelligence systems, with a view to preventing the uncontrolled development and deployment of particularly dangerous AI capabilities and ensuring effective global safeguards and oversight; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed and cross-border impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and that, as with earlier transformative technologies, including nuclear technology in the mid-20th century, responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level; | 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed, cross-border and social, economic and environmental impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and that responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level that is firmly grounded in fundamental rights, democratic accountability, social justice and environmental sustainability; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed and cross-border impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and that, as with earlier transformative technologies, including nuclear technology in the mid-20th century, responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level; | 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed and cross-border impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and that, as with earlier transformative technologies, responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed and cross-border impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and that, as with earlier transformative technologies, including nuclear technology in the mid-20th century, responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level; | 8. Underlines that AI has significant cross-border effects and therefore requires dialogue and international cooperation, while noting that the diversity of legal systems, constitutional traditions and risk assessments calls for a cautious and proportionate approach to any further international initiatives in this field; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed and cross-border impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and that, as with earlier transformative technologies, including nuclear technology in the mid-20th century, responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level; | 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed and cross-border impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and opportunity and that, as with earlier transformative technologies, including nuclear technology in the mid-20th century, responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed and cross-border impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and that, as with earlier transformative technologies, including nuclear technology in the mid-20th century, responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level; | 8. Underlines that AI, by virtue of its scale, speed and cross-border impact, constitutes a systemic global challenge and that, responsible governance requires the timely negotiation and establishment of a dedicated international convention or treaty on AI at a global level, ensuring enforceable safeguards for fundamental rights and democratic governance; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Takes note of the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence; considers that, given the global systemic nature of AI technologies, further reflection should take place on the establishment of a global multilateral framework or convention aimed at preventing systemic risks and ensuring democratic accountability at a global level; | 9. Takes note of the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence; considers that, given the global systemic nature of AI technologies, further reflection should take place on the establishment of a global multilateral framework or convention aimed at preventing systemic risks and ensuring democratic accountability at a global level; believes that any such global framework must address all risks posed by AI systems in a human- and rights-based approach, prevent the concentration of technological and data power, ensure equitable access to AI benefits and embed robust safeguards; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Takes note of the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence; considers that, given the global systemic nature of AI technologies, further reflection should take place on the establishment of a global multilateral framework or convention aimed at preventing systemic risks and ensuring democratic accountability at a global level; | 9. Takes note of the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence; considers that, given the global systemic nature of AI technologies, further reflection should take place on the establishment of a global multilateral framework or convention aimed at preventing systemic risks and ensuring democratic accountability at a global level; is of the view that the Parliament should spearhead such initiatives to urgently address the lack of global frameworks for mitigation of systemic risks stemming from AI; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Takes note of the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence; considers that, given the global systemic nature of AI technologies, further reflection should take place on the establishment of a global multilateral framework or convention aimed at preventing systemic risks and ensuring democratic accountability at a global level; | 9. Takes note of the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence; recalls that any future international cooperation in this field should remain consistent with democratic accountability, legal certainty and the respective competences of the Union and the Member States; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9 a. Believes that in order to safeguard the Union’s foundational values, as enshrined in Article 2 TEU, in the context of the deployment and use of AI systems, the EU needs to drastically improve its efforts in AI-related innovation, research, and education that lead to AI systems which are in line with Union values; calls for a decisive push for technological sovereignty in the EU and for an alliance with likeminded middle powers in order to cooperate efficiently in these fields; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9 a. Underlines that the already significant and continuously increasing ecological footprint of AI development and deployment must be a core component of governance and regulatory frameworks; insists that the Union’s digital transformation must be fully compatible with the European Green Deal and the EU climate neutrality objectives; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Recalls that, in accordance with Articles 10, 13 and 14 TEU, Parliament exercises democratic scrutiny over the functioning of the EU and its institutions; stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations and EU institutions requires Parliament’s analytical capacity to be enhanced in order to ensure transparency, democratic accountability and effective oversight consistent with the Treaties; | 10. Recalls that, in accordance with Articles 10, 13 and 14 TEU, Parliament exercises democratic scrutiny over the functioning of the EU and its institutions; stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations and EU institutions requires Parliament’s analytical capacity to be enhanced in order to ensure transparency, democratic accountability and effective oversight consistent with the Treaties; stresses in that regard the relevance of Parliament’s positions, through its Resolution of 15 January 2013 with recommendations to the Commission on a Law of Administrative Procedure of the European Union (T7-0004/2013), its Resolution of 9 June 2016 for an open, efficient and independent European Union administration (T8-0279/2016), and its Resolutions of 22 November 2023 with recommendations to the Commission on Digitalisation and Administrative Law (T9-0426/2023); |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Recalls that, in accordance with Articles 10, 13 and 14 TEU, Parliament exercises democratic scrutiny over the functioning of the EU and its institutions; stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations and EU institutions requires Parliament’s analytical capacity to be enhanced in order to ensure transparency, democratic accountability and effective oversight consistent with the Treaties; | 10. Recalls that, in accordance with Articles 10, 13 and 14 TEU, Parliament exercises democratic scrutiny over the functioning of the EU and its institutions and that such scrutiny must be strengthened in light of the profound institutional and democratic implications of AI deployment; stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations and EU institutions requires Parliament’s analytical capacity to be enhanced in order to ensure transparency, democratic accountability and effective oversight consistent with the Treaties and to address the risks posed by current AI systems, including inaccuracy, opacity, bias and hallucination tendencies, which distort evidence, undermine legal certainty and weaken democratic decision-making; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Recalls that, in accordance with Articles 10, 13 and 14 TEU, Parliament exercises democratic scrutiny over the functioning of the EU and its institutions; stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations and EU institutions requires Parliament’s analytical capacity to be enhanced in order to ensure transparency, democratic accountability and effective oversight consistent with the Treaties; | 10. Recalls that, in accordance with Articles 10, 13 and 14 TEU, Parliament exercises democratic scrutiny over the functioning of the EU and its institutions; stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations and EU institutions requires Parliament’s analytical capacity to be enhanced in order to ensure transparency, democratic accountability and effective oversight consistent with the Treaties, including the prevention of discriminatory outcomes and oversight of the use of AI systems in decision-making, risk assessment and administrative procedures within Union institutions, bodies and agencies; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10 a. Highlights that the effective and inclusive deployment of artificial intelligence and digital technologies in the Union requires addressing persistent digital divides across Member States and regions through targeted measures to strengthen skills and ensure a strong foundation in digital and civic education, guarantee accessibility and support the inclusion of older persons, persons with disabilities, individuals with limited digital competences and those living in disadvantaged or remote areas, in order to ensure that the benefits of artificial intelligence are broadly shared and do not exacerbate existing inequalities; underlines that these conditions are essential to support democratic participation, equal access to Union processes and the proper functioning of the Union’s constitutional framework; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Calls for the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services; | 11. Calls for consideration on the possible development of an internal analytical capacity within the European Parliament dedicated to artificial intelligence, including through the gradual consolidation of existing expertise and services into a possible AI observatory function within Parliament’s administration; considers that such a function, if deemed appropriate in the future, could serve as a cross-committee support resource for information-gathering, analysis and knowledge-sharing on AI-related developments affecting governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; underlines that any such step should be carefully assessed in terms of scope, necessity and subsidiarity, and, where relevant, be organised within existing administrative structures in a cost-efficient manner without creating new layers of institutional duplication; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Calls for the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services; | 11. Calls for the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services, with a clear mandate to support parliamentary scrutiny, including ex post evaluation of AI-related legislation, monitoring of institutional practices, and analysis of the impact of AI on the Union’s institutional balance and democratic processes; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Calls for the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services; | 11. Calls for the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services; the AI Observatory's mission would be of a support nature and not a regulatory one and it would be tasked, among others, with overseeing the use of AI in law-making inside the EP in order to guarantee there is no AI interference in the process; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Calls for the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services; | 11. Calls for the establishment of an analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Calls for the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services; | 11. Calls for the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services, while ensuring full independence and enabling robust verification mechanisms, algorithmic transparency tools and public-interest audits; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Calls for the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services; | 11. Calls for an assessment of whether Parliament’s existing administrative and research capacities are sufficient to support committees in technical and legal questions relating to artificial intelligence; considers that any additional internal capacity, if deemed necessary, should remain strictly limited to analytical support for parliamentary work, be budget-neutral, avoid duplication with existing Union and national bodies, and not exercise any regulatory, supervisory, investigatory or election-monitoring functions; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Calls for the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services; | 11. Calls to consider the establishment of a European Parliament AI Observatory as a permanent analytical structure within Parliament’s administration, operating as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight; stresses that the creation of such a capacity could be organised within the administrative structures of Parliament in a budget-neutral manner, building on existing expertise and services; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11 a. Stresses that the effective implementation and enforcement of Union rules on artificial intelligence, in particular those related to general-purpose AI systems and AI systems embedded in very large online platforms and very large search engines, require a strong, central and adequately resourced Commission’s AI Office; welcomes its growing role in ensuring consistent supervision at Union level and reducing fragmentation across Member States, and underlines that any expansion of its competences must be matched by commensurate operational capacity; calls on the Commission to equip the AI Office with sufficient and stable financial, technical and human resources, including highly specialised expertise, and to set out a concrete plan to reinforce its capacity through the annual budget and the upcoming Multiannual Financial Framework, including appropriate staffing, operational funding and technical tools necessary to effectively carry out its tasks; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11 a. Stresses further that the European Parliament AI Observatory should, as part of its analytical mandate, systematically assess the state of AI readiness and adoption across all Member States; considers that such assessment should pay particular attention to structural barriers to AI adoption, including gaps in digital infrastructure, administrative capacity and access to computing resources; underlines that these barriers may place Member States undergoing digital transition, or those with less developed AI ecosystems, at a systematic disadvantage in the emerging AI economy; emphasises that the Observatory's work in this regard should contribute to an equitable and cohesion-sensitive understanding of AI deployment across the Union; calls, therefore, for the Observatory's findings on Member State readiness and structural disparities to directly inform Parliament's legislative and budgetary work accordingly; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12. Stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations, including the EU institutions, raises important questions relating to transparency, accountability and administrative due process; emphasises that Parliament should maintain sufficient internal analytical capacity to assess such developments independently in order to safeguard its institutional prerogatives and oversight functions and build its own institutional memory in this field; | 12. Stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations, including the EU institutions, raises important questions relating to transparency, accountability and administrative due process; emphasises that Parliament should create sufficient internal analytical capacity to assess such developments independently in order to safeguard its institutional prerogatives and oversight functions and build its own institutional memory in this field; highlights that the Parliament should lead by example and establish a framework of good governance for parliamentary work assisted by AI to ensure transparency and accountability for the work aided by AI, including which tasks should and should not be outsourced to such technologies; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12. Stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations, including the EU institutions, raises important questions relating to transparency, accountability and administrative due process; emphasises that Parliament should maintain sufficient internal analytical capacity to assess such developments independently in order to safeguard its institutional prerogatives and oversight functions and build its own institutional memory in this field; | 12. Stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations, including the EU institutions, raises important questions relating to transparency, accountability and administrative due process; emphasises that Parliament should maintain sufficient internal analytical capacity to assess such developments independently in order to safeguard its institutional prerogatives and oversight functions and build its own institutional memory in this field, including the right to explanation and human review of automated decisions; and to ensure that the use of AI within Union institutions does not undermine principles of good administration, transparency and accountability; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12. Stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations, including the EU institutions, raises important questions relating to transparency, accountability and administrative due process; emphasises that Parliament should maintain sufficient internal analytical capacity to assess such developments independently in order to safeguard its institutional prerogatives and oversight functions and build its own institutional memory in this field; | 12. Stresses that the EU is heavily reliant on foreign-designed AI models and systems and that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations, including the EU institutions, raises important questions relating to security, transparency, accountability and administrative due process; emphasises that Parliament should maintain sufficient internal analytical capacity to assess such developments independently in order to safeguard its institutional prerogatives, democratic processes and oversight functions and build its own institutional memory in this field; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12. Stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations, including the EU institutions, raises important questions relating to transparency, accountability and administrative due process; emphasises that Parliament should maintain sufficient internal analytical capacity to assess such developments independently in order to safeguard its institutional prerogatives and oversight functions and build its own institutional memory in this field; | 12. Stresses that the increasing deployment of AI systems within public administrations, including the EU institutions, warrants careful monitoring and structured reflection with regard to transparency, accountability and administrative due process; underlines the importance of ensuring that the Parliament retains adequate internal analytical expertise to follow these developments and assess their implications where necessary, in order to support its oversight functions and preserve institutional continuity and knowledge in this evolving field; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12 a. Highlights the need to prioritise the use of AI tools that are developed in the EU, by European actors and hosted within the Union, in order to ensure secure and trustworthy use, particularly when such tools are deployed within European institutions; stresses that this approach contributes to safeguarding sensitive data, reinforcing technological sovereignty, and ensuring compliance with EU standards on sustainability, data protection, cybersecurity, and democratic integrity; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12 a. stresses that the deployment of AI systems in judicial proceedings carries alarming risks of wrongful application of justice and a permanently flawed case-law due to lack of human judgement; calls for the restriction of use of AI systems by the judiciary to safeguard the sound application of justice accross the EU and by the CJEU; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12 b. stresses that AI must remain strictly an auxiliary tool in the legal field, used exclusively for administrative support, legal research, or the streamlining of technical activities, without participating in the judicial decision-making process and without in any way substituting human judgment or the role of the courts; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls for the use of AI tools to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has been already adopted,in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls for the use of AI tools to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has been already adopted,in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed; | 13. Calls for further consideration on the use of AI tools to support the monitoring and assessment of the implementation of already adopted EU legislation, including, where appropriate, by assisting in the identification of national and regional legal acts relevant to implementation and by highlighting possible inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation; underlines that such tools should serve strictly as supportive analytical instruments without prejudice to Member States’ competences in implementation and enforcement, and should be used in a manner that remains transparent, proportionate and fully subject to human oversight, thereby contributing, where appropriate, to a better understanding of legal coherence across levels of governance and implementation challenges in the Member States; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls for the use of AI tools to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has been already adopted,in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed; | 13. Notes that AI tools could be further developed to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has been already adopted, in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; stresses, however, that current AI tools have shown significant shortcomings that pose significant risks to legislative quality and evidence-based policy-making; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls for the use of AI tools to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has been already adopted,in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed; | 13. Calls for the use of AI tools to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has already been adopted, in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed, including human oversight, auditability and verification safeguards to ensure reliability, accountability and compliance with EU values and the Treaties; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls for the use of AI tools to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has been already adopted,in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed; | 13. Notes that AI tools may, where appropriate, assist internal analytical work relating to the implementation of Union law, provided that such use remains subject to meaningful human review, methodological transparency, data protection requirements and due regard for legal complexity, and does not substitute political or legal assessment by the competent institutions and authorities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls for the use of AI tools to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has been already adopted,in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed; | 13. Calls for the use of AI tools to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has been already adopted,in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed, provided that such tools are subject to strict safeguards, transparency requirements and human oversight; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls for the use of AI tools to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has been already adopted,in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed; | 13. Calls for the careful and calculated use of AI tools to support the monitoring, implementation, and enforcement of EU legislation that has been already adopted, in particular by identifying national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, gold-plating, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence across levels of governance, addressing implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; emphasises, in this context, the importance of a human-centric approach when such tools are deployed; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13 a. Underlines that effective supervision and enforcement of Union rules on artificial intelligence are essential to ensure legal certainty, foster trust among users and citizens, and create the conditions for responsible innovation and the uptake of AI technologies in the Union; emphasises, in this context, that the Union has established a comprehensive regulatory framework, and that the priority must now be its effective, coherent and uniform application across Member States, as a key condition for the credibility of the Union’s legal order and the proper functioning of its institutional framework; stresses that simplification and the reduction of administrative burdens should not weaken enforcement or undermine the consistent application of Union law, and cannot be regarded as an alternative to ensuring a level playing field and maintaining trust in the Union’s regulatory system; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Calls for analysis of overlaps, gaps and inconsistencies between the numerous AI-related legislative and policy instruments and their implementation in order to reduce fragmentation and ensure coherent application across sectoral domains, including coherent institutional implementation; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Calls for analysis of overlaps, gaps and inconsistencies between the numerous AI-related legislative and policy instruments and their implementation in order to reduce fragmentation and ensure coherent application across sectoral domains, including coherent institutional implementation; | 14. Calls for the full implementation of existing EU-level regulation in the field of AI and stresses that such implementation must be firmly grounded in a human- and rights-based approach; calls for analysis of overlaps, gaps and inconsistencies between AI-related legislative and policy instruments and their implementation in order to reduce fragmentation and ensure robust and coherent application across sectoral domains, including coherent institutional implementation, and to address the risks posed by current AI systems; believes that this analysis must also identify areas where corporate concentration, data asymmetries or insufficient safeguards threaten institutional balance, and must support the development of transparent, accountable and rights-based governance mechanisms across all EU institutions; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14 a. reminds that AI is not a silver bullet to solve all EU policy and legal inconsistences but rather a collection of emerging and still deeply flawed technological tools that needs to be used cautiously, critically and in moderation in order not to discredit the Parliament’s democratic role and introduce biases, errors and malicious interference in legislative processes and administrative work; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 15. Stresses that the analytical work carried out within Parliament, including by the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory, could contribute to identifying cross-sectoral gaps, overlaps and inconsistencies in the EU’s broader legal framework for AI; | 15. Stresses that the analytical work carried out within Parliament, including by the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory, could contribute to identifying cross-sectoral gaps, overlaps and inconsistencies in the EU’s broader legal framework for AI; expresses concern that the rushed delegation of analytical tasks to AI systems could create a 'competence trap' where lawmakers and their staff could lose the capacity to engage deeply with the substance of files, effectively transferring de facto decision-making power to the algorithms and their owners; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 15. Stresses that the analytical work carried out within Parliament, including by the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory, could contribute to identifying cross-sectoral gaps, overlaps and inconsistencies in the EU’s broader legal framework for AI; | 15. Stresses that analytical work carried out within the Parliament, including through any possible future internal AI-focused analytical capacity, could, where appropriate, contribute to identifying cross-sectoral gaps, overlaps and inconsistencies in the Union’s evolving legal and regulatory framework for artificial intelligence; underlines that such work should remain strictly analytical in nature, serve Parliament’s internal deliberations, and fully respect the respective competences of the institutions and the Member States; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 15. Stresses that the analytical work carried out within Parliament, including by the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory, could contribute to identifying cross-sectoral gaps, overlaps and inconsistencies in the EU’s broader legal framework for AI; | 15. Stresses that the analytical work carried out within Parliament, including by the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory, could contribute to identifying regulatory needs, cross-sectoral gaps, risks, asymmetries, overlaps, insufficient safeguards and inconsistencies in the EU’s broader legal framework for AI; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16. Stresses that the European Parliament AI Observatory could contribute to the monitoring of institutional AI governance, accountability and explainability and of the implications of AI systems deployed within the institution, and could support Parliament’s follow-up to the relevant Council conclusions; | 16. Stresses that internal analytical work within the Parliament could contribute to the structured assessment of institutional AI governance, accountability and explainability, as well as of the implications of AI systems deployed within the institution; underlines that such work should remain strictly internal and analytical in nature, serving to inform parliamentary deliberations and oversight functions, and may, where appropriate, support Parliament’s consideration of relevant Council conclusions, in full respect of institutional competences and the principle of institutional balance; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16. Stresses that the European Parliament AI Observatory could contribute to the monitoring of institutional AI governance, accountability and explainability and of the implications of AI systems deployed within the institution, and could support Parliament’s follow-up to the relevant Council conclusions; | 16. Stresses that the European Parliament AI Observatory could contribute to the monitoring of institutional AI governance, accountability and explainability and of the implications of AI systems deployed within the institution, and could support Parliament’s follow-up to the relevant Council conclusions, and should provide regular reports to Parliament’s competent committees, in particular AFCO, on institutional and constitutional implications of AI developments; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16. Stresses that the European Parliament AI Observatory could contribute to the monitoring of institutional AI governance, accountability and explainability and of the implications of AI systems deployed within the institution, and could support Parliament’s follow-up to the relevant Council conclusions; | 16. Stresses that the European Parliament AI Observatory could contribute to the monitoring and auditing of institutional AI governance, accountability and explainability and of the implications of AI systems deployed within the institution with a view to ensuring safe, ethical and lawful deployment of AI, and could support Parliament’s follow-up to the relevant Council conclusions; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Calls on the Chair of the AI Board to invite the European Parliament AI Observatory, once it is established, to the board’s meetings to ensure parliamentary scrutiny and interinstitutional coherence in the EU’s AI policy; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Calls on the Chair of the AI Board to invite the European Parliament AI Observatory, once it is established, to the board’s meetings to ensure parliamentary scrutiny and interinstitutional coherence in the EU’s AI policy; | 17. Encourages appropriate exchanges of information between the institutions, within the framework laid down by the Artificial Intelligence Act and with full respect for the institutional balance established by the Treaties; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Calls on the Chair of the AI Board to invite the European Parliament AI Observatory, once it is established, to the board’s meetings to ensure parliamentary scrutiny and interinstitutional coherence in the EU’s AI policy; | 17. Calls on the Chair of the AI Board to invite the European Parliament AI Observatory, if established, to the board’s meetings to ensure parliamentary scrutiny and interinstitutional coherence in the EU’s AI policy; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Underlines that strengthened cooperation in the field of AI governance between Parliament, national parliaments and the national competent authorities, in accordance with Article 70 of the Artificial Intelligence Act, is essential in order to exchange best practice, improve legislative coherence and support parliamentary scrutiny of AI deployment across the EU; | 18. Underlines that strengthened cooperation in the field of AI governance between Parliament, national parliaments and the national competent authorities, in accordance with Article 70 of the Artificial Intelligence Act, is essential in order to exchange best practice, improve legislative coherence and support parliamentary scrutiny of AI deployment across the Union; welcomes, in this context, the outcomes of the Interparliamentary Committee Meetings (ICM) on AI with national parliaments, and calls for the establishment of a regular exchange of policy approaches and best practices with national parliaments, to be coordinated and supported by the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Underlines that strengthened cooperation in the field of AI governance between Parliament, national parliaments and the national competent authorities, in accordance with Article 70 of the Artificial Intelligence Act, is essential in order to exchange best practice, improve legislative coherence and support parliamentary scrutiny of AI deployment across the EU; | 18. Underlines that strengthened cooperation in the field of AI governance between the Parliament, national parliaments and national competent authorities, in accordance with Article 70 of the Artificial Intelligence Act, should be further explored as a voluntary framework for the exchange of best practices and information, where appropriate, with the aim of improving mutual understanding and coherence of approaches; stresses that such cooperation must fully respect the allocation of competences between the Union and the Member States; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Underlines that strengthened cooperation in the field of AI governance between Parliament, national parliaments and the national competent authorities, in accordance with Article 70 of the Artificial Intelligence Act, is essential in order to exchange best practice, improve legislative coherence and support parliamentary scrutiny of AI deployment across the EU; | 18. Underlines that strengthened cooperation in the field of AI governance between Parliament, national parliaments and the national competent authorities, in accordance with Article 70 of the Artificial Intelligence Act, is essential in order to ensure the effective enforcement of the AI Act, exchange best practice, prevent legal fragmentation, improve legislative coherence and support democratic accountability and parliamentary scrutiny of AI deployment across the EU; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Underlines that strengthened cooperation in the field of AI governance between Parliament, national parliaments and the national competent authorities, in accordance with Article 70 of the Artificial Intelligence Act, is essential in order to exchange best practice, improve legislative coherence and support parliamentary scrutiny of AI deployment across the EU; | 18. Underlines that voluntary exchanges of experience between Parliament, national parliaments and the national competent authorities may be useful for the sharing of best practice, while fully respecting the responsibilities of the Member States and their authorities in areas not harmonised by Union law; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Underlines that strengthened cooperation in the field of AI governance between Parliament, national parliaments and the national competent authorities, in accordance with Article 70 of the Artificial Intelligence Act, is essential in order to exchange best practice, improve legislative coherence and support parliamentary scrutiny of AI deployment across the EU; | 18. Underlines that strengthened cooperation in the field of AI governance between Parliament, national parliaments and the national competent authorities, in accordance with Article 70 of the Artificial Intelligence Act, is essential in order to exchange best practice, improve legislative coherence and support parliamentary scrutiny of AI deployment across the EU and the candidate countries; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Stresses that the effective governance of artificial intelligence in the Union requires strong and structured cooperation between Union bodies and national competent authorities; emphasises, in particular, the importance of ensuring close coordination between the European AI Office, the Commission’s Artificial Intelligence Board, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB), the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) and other relevant Union agencies and authorities, as well as with national supervisory authorities; underlines that such cooperation is essential to ensure consistent interpretation and application of Union law, avoid regulatory fragmentation and overlaps, and strengthen legal certainty and democratic accountability within the Union’s institutional framework; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. acknowledges the immense implications for copyright and ownership due to AI advancements; stresses in this regard the need to protect Parliament’s integrity from distortion; underlines that content created by Parliament and its Members during its legislative, budgetary, scrutiny or political work must be clearly identifiable and protected; stresses that from an institutional perspective AI governance must include rules to watermark output and the possibility to assign ownership; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Highlights the importance of enforcing the Artificial Intelligence Act and the central role of the European AI Office; calls on the Commission to allocate sufficient budgetary resources, including human resources, to the European AI Office; commits itself to using existing budgetary instruments to adequately equip the European AI office with funds; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 b. highlights in particular the threat of fake attribution to Parliament’s work and the potential occurrence of deepfakes using images, videos, or audio recorded during Parliament’s activities and interventions of its Members; recalls that rapid solutions are needed to identify and combat such threats to maintain trust in Parliament and other EU institutions; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Calls for systematic parliamentary assessment of AI-related risks to democratic processes, including electoral integrity, and for the European Parliament AI Observatory to support the monitoring of elections and European political parties, considering that AI increasingly shapes political communication, electoral processes, public discourse and decision-making; | 19. Calls for a systematic, evidence-based parliamentary mapping and assessment of AI-related risks to democratic processes, including electoral integrity, with full respect for Member States’ competences in the organisation and supervision of elections; emphasises that any role of the European Parliament AI Observatory should be limited to analytical support, information exchange and transparency-enhancing activities, without extending to operational monitoring of elections or political actors; underlines that, given the growing impact of AI on political communication, electoral processes and public discourse, such mapping should serve as a basis for a Member State-driven reflection on possible future actions, avoiding premature or disproportionate intervention at Union level; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Calls for systematic parliamentary assessment of AI-related risks to democratic processes, including electoral integrity, and for the European Parliament AI Observatory to support the monitoring of elections and European political parties, considering that AI increasingly shapes political communication, electoral processes, public discourse and decision-making; | 19. Calls for systematic parliamentary assessment of AI-related risks to democratic processes, including electoral integrity, and for the European Parliament AI Observatory to support the monitoring of elections and European political parties, considering that AI increasingly shapes political communication, electoral processes, public discourse and decision-making; calls, in this context, for the active monitoring and exposure of dark patterns, micro-targeting, and deepfakes in political campaigning and for the strict monitoring of the ban on the use of AI for biometric categorisation and the processing of sensitive personal data for the purpose of influencing electoral behaviour; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Calls for systematic parliamentary assessment of AI-related risks to democratic processes, including electoral integrity, and for the European Parliament AI Observatory to support the monitoring of elections and European political parties, considering that AI increasingly shapes political communication, electoral processes, public discourse and decision-making; | 19. Calls for systematic parliamentary assessment of AI-related risks to democratic processes, including electoral integrity, disinformation, manipulation and foreign interference, and for the European Parliament AI Observatory to support the monitoring of elections and European political parties, considering that AI increasingly shapes political communication, electoral processes, public discourse and decision-making, and stresses that AFCO should play a leading role in overseeing these risks, including in relation to European political parties, electoral frameworks and democratic participation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Calls for systematic parliamentary assessment of AI-related risks to democratic processes, including electoral integrity, and for the European Parliament AI Observatory to support the monitoring of elections and European political parties, considering that AI increasingly shapes political communication, electoral processes, public discourse and decision-making; | 19. Calls for systematic parliamentary assessment of AI-related risks to democratic processes, including electoral integrity, and for the European Parliament AI Observatory to support the monitoring of elections and European political parties wherever it does not lead to duplication of competences; reminds that strengthening democratic integrity of elections in the EU and candidate countries is a coordinated effort to be led by the Democracy Shield’s European Centre for Democratic Resilience; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Calls for systematic parliamentary assessment of AI-related risks to democratic processes, including electoral integrity, and for the European Parliament AI Observatory to support the monitoring of elections and European political parties, considering that AI increasingly shapes political communication, electoral processes, public discourse and decision-making; | 19. Calls for careful assessment of specific unlawful uses of AI that may affect democratic processes, while stressing that lawful political communication, public debate and electoral campaigning must remain protected in accordance with freedom of expression, political pluralism and the applicable division of competences; underlines that the Member States are responsbible for the organisation of elections and that the Parliament is not in a position to judge their fairness; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Calls for systematic parliamentary assessment of AI-related risks to democratic processes, including electoral integrity, and for the European Parliament AI Observatory to support the monitoring of elections and European political parties, considering that AI increasingly shapes political communication, electoral processes, public discourse and decision-making; | 19. Calls for systematic parliamentary assessment of AI-related risks and opportunities for democratic processes, including electoral integrity, and for the European Parliament AI Observatory to support the monitoring of elections and European political parties, considering that AI increasingly shapes political communication, electoral processes, public discourse and decision-making; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 a. Underlines the potential of artificial intelligence and digital technologies to strengthen democratic participation, transparency and accountability in the Union; introduces the concept of “civic AI”, understood as the use of AI systems to support citizen engagement, facilitate access to information and improve citizens’ understanding of complex policy processes and legislative work, thereby enabling more informed and meaningful participation in Union decision-making; highlights that such tools can help overcome barriers related to scale, language and complexity, while also raising challenges related to bias, opacity and the traceability of citizens’ input; stresses, therefore, that the deployment of civic AI must be fully aligned with fundamental rights, democratic principles and the rule of law, ensuring inclusiveness, transparency and meaningful human oversight; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 a. Is concerned about the potentially detrimental effect of AI on media pluralism, which is essential for a fair conduct of elections; calls for enhanced strategies on European level together with the Member States to safeguard high levels of media pluralism across the EU in light of increased pressure by AI on business models of media outlets; stresses the importance of using the applicable tools of EU competition law, including the mechanisms enshrined in the Digital Services Act and in the Digital Market Act, to compensate for the imbalance caused by gate-keepers in the access to and fair compensation to media content’s creators; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 b. Emphasises the importance of citizen participation in Union decision-making and consultation as a core component of democratic legitimacy, in line with Articles 10 and 11 TEU; recalls that recent initiatives, such as the Conference on the Future of Europe, have demonstrated citizens’ willingness to engage when provided with meaningful opportunities and appropriate formats; considers that the use of civic AI can further enhance participation by facilitating citizens’ access to and participation in decision-making, enabling large-scale and multilingual engagement, and supporting the processing and analysis of citizens’ contributions; stresses, however, that the deployment of such tools must ensure transparency, inclusiveness and accountability, and be effectively linked to formal decision-making in order to deliver tangible impact and strengthen trust in Union institutions; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 c. Stresses that citizens’ participation in the democratic process is not limited to decision-making, but also requires effective access to information and a clear understanding of public policies and legislative processes; highlights the potential of artificial intelligence and digital tools, including user-facing applications, to support citizens in navigating complex policy debates and accessing reliable information, documents and Union law; calls for further exploration of common European digital solutions, including the possible development of a user-friendly “EU democracy app” at Union level, to facilitate both participation and access to information, while ensuring transparency, inclusiveness, data protection and full respect for fundamental rights; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 20. Stressesthat, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/9942 , is increasingly ill-suited to addressing emerging challenges linked to the use of AI in electoral processes; emphasises, therefore, the importance of preparing the ground for a future reform of the European electoral law in accordance with Article 223 TFEU, which would reflect the impact of AI on the European electoral process, making the European electoral process more resilient in the context of AI misinformation and manipulation; | 20. Stresses that, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994, remains primarily a framework of coordination and does not confer a mandate for far-reaching harmonisation in the organisation of elections, which remains a core competence of the Member States; considers that emerging challenges linked to the use of AI in electoral processes should first be subject to a thorough, evidence-based mapping, taking full account of national specificities, constitutional identities and democratic traditions; calls for a cautious and Member State-driven reflection on any possible future reforms under Article 223 TFEU, ensuring that any such considerations fully respect national sovereignty and avoid premature or disproportionate regulatory responses, while exploring ways to strengthen resilience against AI-enabled misinformation and manipulation; |
| 2 Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj). |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 20. Stressesthat, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/9942 , is increasingly ill-suited to addressing emerging challenges linked to the use of AI in electoral processes; emphasises, therefore, the importance of preparing the ground for a future reform of the European electoral law in accordance with Article 223 TFEU, which would reflect the impact of AI on the European electoral process, making the European electoral process more resilient in the context of AI misinformation and manipulation; | 20. Notes that the use of AI may raise new questions in the electoral context; stresses, however, that any consideration of possible responses must respect the limited harmonisation of the European electoral framework, the competence of the Member States to organize electoral processes, and the need to avoid disproportionate restrictions on lawful political speech and campaigning; |
| 2 Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj). |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 20. Stressesthat, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/9942 , is increasingly ill-suited to addressing emerging challenges linked to the use of AI in electoral processes; emphasises, therefore, the importance of preparing the ground for a future reform of the European electoral law in accordance with Article 223 TFEU, which would reflect the impact of AI on the European electoral process, making the European electoral process more resilient in the context of AI misinformation and manipulation; | 20. Stressesthat, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/9942 , is increasingly ill-suited to addressing emerging challenges linked to the use of AI in electoral processes; emphasises, therefore, the importance of preparing the ground for a future reform of the European electoral law in accordance with Article 223 TFEU, which would reflect the impact of AI on the European electoral process, making the European electoral process more resilient in the context of AI misinformation and manipulation, including provisions addressing the use of artificial intelligence in electoral campaigning, political advertising, and voter targeting; |
| 2 Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj). | 2 Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj). |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 20. Stressesthat, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/9942 , is increasingly ill-suited to addressing emerging challenges linked to the use of AI in electoral processes; emphasises, therefore, the importance of preparing the ground for a future reform of the European electoral law in accordance with Article 223 TFEU, which would reflect the impact of AI on the European electoral process, making the European electoral process more resilient in the context of AI misinformation and manipulation; | 20. Stresses that, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/9942, is increasingly ill-suited to addressing current and emerging risks and challenges linked to the use of AI in electoral processes; emphasises, therefore, the importance of preparing the ground for a future reform of the European electoral law in accordance with Article 223 TFEU, which would reflect the impact of AI on the European electoral process, introduce effective safeguards and make the European electoral process more resilient in the context of AI misinformation and manipulation; |
| 2 Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj). | 2 Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj). |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 20. Stressesthat, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/9942 , is increasingly ill-suited to addressing emerging challenges linked to the use of AI in electoral processes; emphasises, therefore, the importance of preparing the ground for a future reform of the European electoral law in accordance with Article 223 TFEU, which would reflect the impact of AI on the European electoral process, making the European electoral process more resilient in the context of AI misinformation and manipulation; | 20. Stressesthat, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/9942 , is increasingly ill-suited to addressing emerging challenges linked to the use of AI in electoral processes; emphasises, therefore, the importance of preparing the ground for a future reform of the European electoral law in accordance with Article 223 TFEU, which would reflect the impact of AI on the European electoral process, making the European electoral process more resilient in the context of AI information manipulation and interference; |
| 2 Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj). | 2 Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj). |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 20. Stressesthat, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/9942 , is increasingly ill-suited to addressing emerging challenges linked to the use of AI in electoral processes; emphasises, therefore, the importance of preparing the ground for a future reform of the European electoral law in accordance with Article 223 TFEU, which would reflect the impact of AI on the European electoral process, making the European electoral process more resilient in the context of AI misinformation and manipulation; | 20. Stressesthat, owing to its fragmentation and limited harmonisation, the current European electoral legal framework, as reflected in Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/9942 , is increasingly ill-suited to addressing emerging challenges and opportunities linked to the use of AI in electoral processes; emphasises, therefore, the importance to accelerate the ongoing reform of the European electoral law in accordance with Article 223 TFEU, which would reflect the impact of AI on the European electoral process, making the European electoral process more resilient in the context of AI misinformation and manipulation; |
| 2 Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj). | 2 Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj). |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 20 a. Highlights the relevancy of schools, universities, as well as educational and training institutions across all levels of government in enhancing AI literacy through education and research; believes that this AI literacy is the cornerstone to safeguarding democratic systems and elections from AI information manipulations and interferences; calls for increased resources on EU and Member State levels to achieve adequate levels of AI literacy in society; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 21. Emphasises that the rapid evolution of the governance landscape of the EU, particularly in response to digital transformation, AI and increasingly complex regulatory frameworks, is progressively testing the adequacy of the existing Treaty provisions governing institutional competences, democratic accountability and parliamentary scrutiny; | 21. Emphasises that the rapid evolution of the EU governance landscape, notably in the context of digital transformation, AI and increasingly complex regulatory frameworks, warrants a careful and evidence-based mapping of its practical implications for institutional competences, democratic accountability and parliamentary scrutiny; underlines that such developments do not in themselves justify a reinterpretation or expansion of Union competences, and should be assessed with full respect for the Treaties, the principles of conferral, subsidiarity and proportionality, as well as the Member States’ constitutional identities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 21. Emphasises that the rapid evolution of the governance landscape of the EU, particularly in response to digital transformation, AI and increasingly complex regulatory frameworks, is progressively testing the adequacy of the existing Treaty provisions governing institutional competences, democratic accountability and parliamentary scrutiny; | 21. Emphasises that the rapid evolution of the governance landscape of the EU, particularly in response to digital transformation, AI and increasingly complex regulatory frameworks, is progressively testing the adequacy of the existing Treaty provisions governing institutional competences, democratic accountability and parliamentary scrutiny; considers that the emergence of transformative AI capabilities capable of systemic disruption requires forward-looking institutional adaptation to maintain the Union's democratic legitimacy and governance resilience; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 21. Emphasises that the rapid evolution of the governance landscape of the EU, particularly in response to digital transformation, AI and increasingly complex regulatory frameworks, is progressively testing the adequacy of the existing Treaty provisions governing institutional competences, democratic accountability and parliamentary scrutiny; | 21. Emphasises that technological change should be addressed through the faithful application of the existing Treaty framework, including the principles of conferral, subsidiarity, proportionality and institutional balance; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 21. Emphasises that the rapid evolution of the governance landscape of the EU, particularly in response to digital transformation, AI and increasingly complex regulatory frameworks, is progressively testing the adequacy of the existing Treaty provisions governing institutional competences, democratic accountability and parliamentary scrutiny; | 21. Emphasises that the rapid evolution of the governance landscape of the EU, particularly in response to digital transformation, AI and increasingly complex regulatory frameworks, is progressively testing the adequacy and effectiveness of the existing Treaty provisions governing institutional competences, democratic accountability and parliamentary scrutiny; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 21. Emphasises that the rapid evolution of the governance landscape of the EU, particularly in response to digital transformation, AI and increasingly complex regulatory frameworks, is progressively testing the adequacy of the existing Treaty provisions governing institutional competences, democratic accountability and parliamentary scrutiny; | 21. Emphasises that the rapid evolution of the governance landscape of the EU, particularly in response to digital transformation, AI and increasingly complex regulatory frameworks, is progressively testing the adequacy of the existing institutional framework, democratic accountability and parliamentary scrutiny; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; affirms that any such Treaty reflection must proceed from the principle that competences should remain at national level unless it can be clearly demonstrated that Union-level action produces materially better outcomes for citizens; underlines that Treaty reform must not result in the centralisation of powers in areas where Member States are currently better placed to act, and that the diversity of national approaches to AI governance represents a strength of the Union rather than a problem to be harmonised away; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to current and emerging challenges, notably the profound democratic, societal and economic transformations driven by AI, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; insists that Treaty evolution must reinforce social justice, equality, environmental sustainability and the protection of fundamental rights in the digital age; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | 22. Stresses that any policy response to emerging technological challenges should remain within the competences conferred by the existing Treaties and fully respect subsidiarity, proportionality and the constitutional identities of the Member States; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | 22. Stresses, therefore, that a structured and inclusive evolution of the Treaties is necessary in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | 22. Stresses, therefore, that a reform of the Treaties is more necessary and pressing than ever, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges and opportunities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while strengthening democratic accountability, parliamentary prerogatives and the Union’s social dimension and fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties may be necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities in accordance with Article 4(2) TEU; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to the emerging challenges posed by AI, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties is necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; | 22. Stresses, therefore, that structured and inclusive reflection on the possible evolution of the Treaties may be necessary in the medium to long term, in order to ensure that the EU’s governance architecture remains coherent, transparent, democratically legitimate and capable of responding effectively to emerging challenges, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and the Member States’ constitutional identities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the deployment of artificial intelligence, in particular in high-risk areas such as employment, law enforcement, and access to public services, is subject to strict safeguards, including the possibility of prohibitions where fundamental rights cannot be guaranteed, and to ensure that AI contributes to reducing inequalities, promoting quality employment and strengthening the European social model; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22 b. Stresses that the increasing use of delegated and implementing acts in the field of artificial intelligence must not undermine Parliament’s role as co-legislator; calls for enhanced scrutiny mechanisms to ensure democratic accountability and transparency in the adoption of such acts; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22 c. Calls for the recognition and effective enforcement of the right of individuals to meaningful human intervention in decisions taken or supported by artificial intelligence systems within public administrations, in line with the principles of good administration and democratic accountability; |
Connections
The dossier, the decisions on this text and its other versions.
No connections found for this item.
Sources & citation
Where the facts on this page come from, and how to cite it.
- Data source
- Licensed CC BY 4.0.
- Retrieved
- 25 September 2026
Cite as
European Parliament (2026). “AMENDMENTS 1 - 180 - Draft report Institutional aspects of artificial intelligence in the context of European integration”. Text, 29 April 2026. docId AFCO-AM-787899. EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/AFCO-AM-787899 (retrieved 25 September 2026). Data: EP Open Data API: document record, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/api/v2/documents/AFCO-AM-787899 (CC BY 4.0).
BibTeX
@misc{epw-text-afco-am-787899,
author = {{European Parliament}},
title = {{AMENDMENTS 1 - 180 - Draft report Institutional aspects of artificial intelligence in the context of European integration}},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-04-29},
howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/AFCO-AM-787899}},
url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/AFCO-AM-787899},
urldate = {2026-09-25},
publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
note = {Text. docId AFCO-AM-787899. Data: EP Open Data API: document record (CC BY 4.0)}
}