Text · Opinion parliamentary committee
On institutional aspects of artificial intelligence in the context of European integration
Document LIBE-AD-787655 · 2025/2118(INI)
- Kind
- Opinion parliamentary committee LIBE-AD-787655
- Date
- 24 June 2026
- Committee
- Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs
- Rapporteur
- Lukas Mandl
- Dossier
- 2025-2118
More facts (3)
- Formats
- Official page PDF Word
- Subject matter
- c_964d98cc, INST, TECN
- 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.
The text consists only of the parts below (back matter, procedure pages).
Back matter, 3
Parts that accompany the text rather than belong to it: explanatory statement, annexes, opinions appended by other committees. Collapsed.
Amendments 189 blocks
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs submits the following to the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, as the committee responsible :
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular Articles 16, 114, 173, 179, 180 and 181 thereof, | – having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular Articles 16, 26, 114, 173, 179, 180 and 181 thereof, |
| 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, signed on 5 September 2024, | – having regard to the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law, signed on 5 September 2024 (CoE Framework Convention on AI), |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act)1 , | – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act)1, |
| 1 OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj. | 1 OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj. |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Commission proposal of 19 November 2025 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) 2024/1689 and (EU) 2018/1139 as regards the simplification of the implementation of harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Digital Omnibus on AI) (COM(2025)0836), |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Commission proposal of 19 November 2025 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) 2016/679, (EU) 2018/1724, (EU) 2018/1725, (EU) 2023/2854 and Directives 2002/58/EC, (EU) 2022/2555 and (EU) 2022/2557 as regards the simplification of the digital legislative framework, and repealing Regulations (EU) 2018/1807, (EU) 2019/1150, (EU) 2022/868, and Directive (EU) 2019/1024 (Digital Omnibus) (COM(2025)0837), |
| 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 lays down the founding common values on which the Union is based, and provides an important constitutional framework for Parliament’s scrutiny of artificial intelligence (AI) based on those core values; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| AA. whereas the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provide the foundation for the protection of fundamental rights in the EU; whereas these principles form an important guiding framework for EU policymaking, including in the field of AI; |
| 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 AI require robust governance frameworks grounded in EU legislation, the EU Treaties and international conventions; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| BA. whereas the EU’s institutional approach to AI must ensure that regulatory frameworks remain proportionate and do not create unnecessary administrative burdens; whereas the EU’s AI governance structures should actively promote innovation-enabling environments that help European innovators to compete globally while upholding fundamental rights; whereas such an approach to AI is paramount not only for the EU’s competitiveness, but also for its security, technological sovereignty and strategic autonomy; |
| 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 it consists of a robust set of rules governing the provision and deployment of AI in the internal market, supporting innovation and promoting the uptake of human-centric and trustworthy AI, setting a high standard globally; whereas AI is advancing at an unprecedented pace, reshaping economic activity, public administration and societal interactions; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| CA. whereas the Digital Omnibus on AI introduces targeted simplification measures to ensure the timely, smooth and proportionate implementation of certain provisions of the AI Act; whereas the separate proposal for the Digital Omnibus further looks at the need to clarify how personal data may be used for AI training and development; whereas both proposals reflect the need to adapt the EU’s legal framework in view of the rapid advancement of AI in the EU and globally; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| CB. whereas the CoE Framework Convention on AI puts forward rules to ensure that AI systems adhere to strict ethical standards throughout their life cycles, promote transparency, auditability and effective oversight, and strengthen safeguards to protect fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law; whereas the Framework Convention, open for accession by non-European countries, promotes a global baseline for AI governance that focuses on protecting rights; whereas, at EU level, the principles and obligations laid down in the Framework Convention are already implemented by a coherent body of legislation that sets a higher and more detailed level of protection, including in particular the AI Act; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| CC. whereas fostering trustworthy and human-centric AI is essential for strengthening the EU’s competitiveness, innovation capacity, technological sovereignty and strategic autonomy in an increasingly competitive global environment; |
| 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 directly elected 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, while safeguarding the ability of European technology companies to develop and deploy AI, fostering innovation, competitiveness, and Europe’s technological leadership, as well as protecting fundamental rights and the legal order; |
| 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 and Member State levels, 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 and maintaining regular exchanges between the European Parliament and national parliaments, and identifying potential cross-sectoral overlaps and gaps in the EU’s legal framework for AI with a view to improving coherence, legal certainty and innovation-friendly implementation across the EU, will be of the utmost importance; whereas Parliament’s efforts to enhance its internal analytical and governance capacity related to AI, including by forming a dedicated administrative unit, could build on the work of the AI Act Working Group and further play a central role in Parliament’s institutional AI governance regarding accountability and the explainability of the implications of the AI systems deployed within the institution; whereas this could also contribute to achieving an adequate level of AI literacy among Parliament’s staff; whereas this administrative unit should also build on the experience of the Panel for the Future of Science and Technology (STOA), which was established as a permanent body in 1988 and which has AI among its main thematic priorities, as well as the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS); |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| HA. whereas Parliament’s Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) together with the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) has set up a joint IMCO-LIBE Working Group on the Implementation and Enforcement of the AI Act (AI Act Working Group), serving as a platform for exchange with the Commission, notably its AI Office, and other relevant stakeholders on the state of play of the AI Act’s implementation, and to monitor AI developments more broadly; |
| 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 |
|---|---|
| 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, under effective human oversight, 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, including by streamlining it and making it more efficient and responsive; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| JA. whereas the responsible use of AI systems can improve the quality, accessibility and efficiency of legislative and administrative processes by supporting evidence-based policymaking, facilitating the analysis of complex regulatory frameworks and improving access to information that is relevant for democratic scrutiny; |
| 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 – including through thorough AI literacy training – and support the informed, efficient and responsible use of AI technologies; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| KA. whereas divergences in national interpretations and implementation of EU AI-related legislation risk creating regulatory fragmentation, causing legal uncertainty and creating barriers to cross-border AI deployment within the internal market, particularly for SMEs and start-ups operating across several Member States; whereas AI, under appropriate human oversight, can strengthen Parliament’s capacity for effective and evidence-based scrutiny of the implementation and application of EU law by reducing information asymmetries, improving the analysis of relevant information and helping to address recurring difficulties in accessing the data necessary for democratic oversight; |
| 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, often at very low cost; whereas such technologies may interfere with the integrity of electoral processes and undermine trust in democratic institutions, especially when exploited by hostile actors, including in the context of European elections; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| MA. whereas Article 77 of the AI Act provides for a key role for national public authorities or bodies to supervise or enforce the respect of obligations under EU law protecting fundamental rights, including the right to non-discrimination; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Stresses that the rapid deployment of advanced AI systems must not create legal grey zones or weaken the enforcement of existing laws; emphasises that technological innovation can never come at the expense of the rule of law, public security or democratic accountability; calls for the EU’s AI governance structures to incorporate mechanisms to enable structured consultation with European innovators and emphasises that fostering AI innovation is paramount not only for strengthening the EU’s competitiveness but also for safeguarding its security, technological sovereignty and strategic autonomy; calls on the Commission to ensure that the AI Act is implemented in a systematic and transparent way; |
| 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 and use within institutions must remain under full human oversight, meaning that a natural person must effectively supervise any AI tool while it is in use, thus serving to strengthen citizens’ trust in democratic institutions and public administration; |
| 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, regular and transparent interinstitutional dialogue between Parliament, the Commission and the Council on the institutional implications of AI, including regular exchanges on the implementation of EU AI legislation, administrative coordination and the impact of AI systems on the coherence of the internal market; |
| 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 broad participation by European representatives in global AI governance discussions; supports, therefore, 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; |
| 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 support innovation and competitiveness and comply with strong standards on transparency, sustainability, privacy and the protection of personal data, and cybersecurity, as well as democratic oversight; emphasises, moreover, the importance of promoting trustworthy and human-centric AI, while addressing the systemic risks associated with AI, including so‑called hallucinations and risks of AI poisoning or large language model grooming, which undermine the accuracy and reliability of its output, 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 |
|---|---|
| 7a. Notes with concern the growing reliance on non-European frontier AI systems, the lack of coordinated access to such systems for security evaluation, and the resulting capability gap in AI-driven cyber defence, which raises concerns about strategic dependencies and asymmetric access to critical AI infrastructure; warns that, according to security officials, advanced frontier AI models can dynamically adapt their behaviour, meaning they can be employed for automated vulnerability discovery and exploitation, significantly lowering barriers to sophisticated cyberattacks, enabling the rapid scaling of malicious operations and fundamentally changing the scale and speed of cyber risks; calls for stronger oversight and robust preparedness, including regular stress-testing and scenario-based exercises, to counter AI-enabled cyberattacks and address strategic dependencies on non-European infrastructure, cloud services and foundation models; stresses that the EU must pursue a comprehensive tech sovereignty agenda in the development and deployment of advanced AI systems; |
| 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 creates the potential to significantly boost economic growth, enhance productivity and transform various industries by automating tasks and improving decision-making; stresses, however, that by virtue of its scale, speed of deployment and cross-border impact, it also constitutes a transformative global technology with wide-ranging implications, requiring responsible 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. Recalls the CoE Framework Convention on AI, establishing a global baseline for AI governance; highlights that the AI Act and other relevant EU legislation already set a higher, more detailed level of protection and harmonisation within the internal market; invites countries worldwide to join the Framework Convention and promote the global development of human-centric and trustworthy AI; considers that, given the global systemic nature of AI technologies, regular reflection should take place on promoting international cooperation and effective, innovation-enabling governance, while ensuring respect for existing legal frameworks, preventing systemic risks and strengthening democratic accountability at a global level; takes the view that the EU’s participation in international conventions should serve to promote its vision of AI, its regulatory approach and its competitiveness at the global level; |
| 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 and AI literacy to be enhanced in order to ensure transparency, democratic accountability and effective oversight consistent with the Treaties; |
| 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. Recommends enhancing Parliament’s internal analytical and governance capacity within its administration specifically related to AI with a dedicated administrative unit; stresses that the unit should build on and complement existing expertise and services, including those provided by the EPRS and STOA, therefore allowing it to be organised in a budget-neutral manner, and that it should operate as a service across parliamentary committees to support them in matters related to AI, its governance, institutional balance and democratic oversight, as well as strengthening AI literacy and technical expertise; further highlights that the unit should have a clear analytical and governance structure to guide its priorities and to ensure horizontal capacity building and cross-committee relevance; suggests that the unit could be called the European Parliament AI Observatory; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11a. Recalls the existing analytical work carried out within Parliament, including by the AI Act Working Group established with the purpose of monitoring and scrutinising the implementation and enforcement of the AI Act, contributing to identifying cross-sectoral gaps, overlaps and inconsistencies in the EU’s broader legal framework for AI, as well as monitoring new AI-related developments and challenges; | |
| (Repositioned from paragraph 15) |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11b. Stresses that enhancing Parliament’s internal analytical and governance capacity could further contribute to the monitoring of institutional AI governance, accountability and explainability and of the implications of AI systems deployed within the institution, as well as contributing to achieving an adequate level of AI literacy among its staff, and could support Parliament’s follow-up to the relevant Council conclusions; | |
| (Relocated from paragraph 16) |
| 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, increases the efficiency of internal processes but also raises important questions relating to transparency, accountability, the security of systems and administrative due process; emphasises that Parliament should maintain sufficient internal analytical capacity to assess such deployments and related developments independently in order to safeguard its institutional prerogatives and oversight functions and build its own institutional memory in this field, using existing parliamentary services and expertise where possible, as well as to maintain full control over its cybersecurity and the security of all infrastructures and systems; stresses that this effort should be complemented by thorough AI literacy training programmes; calls, furthermore, for regular assessments of the impact of AI deployment on fundamental rights and privacy; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12a. Highlights the potential of AI to strengthen Parliament’s scrutiny and oversight capacities by facilitating access to relevant information, improving the analysis of complex legislative and regulatory developments and supporting the monitoring of the implementation and enforcement of EU law; underlines that the responsible use of AI could contribute to reducing information asymmetries, enhancing legislative coherence and improving the quality, efficiency and predictability of the EU’s decision-making processes, while fully respecting democratic accountability, transparency and meaningful 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 use of AI tools to support the monitoring and implementation of EU legislation that has already been adopted, by helping to identify national and regional legal acts requiring amendment and by detecting potential inconsistencies, overlaps or risks of legal fragmentation, thereby enhancing legal coherence and reducing costs across levels of governance, helping to identify implementation gaps in the Member States and improving the effectiveness and predictability of EU law; underlines that AI tools may also support evidence-based policymaking, simplification efforts and ex post evaluation of EU legislation, including by reducing disproportionate administrative burdens affecting citizens, businesses and public administrations; emphasises, in this context, the importance of strong human oversight when such tools are deployed; stresses that AI systems must never replace the political responsibility or democratic accountability of human beings; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure a uniform, proportionate and coherent implementation of the EU’s AI framework in a way that supports innovation and competitiveness while fully respecting fundamental rights as well as intellectual property rights and copyright rules, and avoiding unnecessary administrative burdens, overlapping reporting obligations and national gold-plating measures that could fragment the internal market and hinder the scaling-up of trustworthy European AI solutions; |
| 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 analysis of overlaps, gaps and inconsistencies between the numerous AI-related legislative and policy instruments and their implementation in order to reduce fragmentation and avoid excessive burdens, while ensuring coherent application across sectoral domains, including coherent institutional implementation; |
| 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; | deleted |
| (Relocated to paragraph 11 a) |
| 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; | deleted |
| (Relocated in paragraph 11 b) |
| 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 |
|---|---|
| 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 European Parliament, national parliaments and the national competent authorities, established in accordance with Article 70 of the AI Act, is essential in order to exchange best practice, improve legislative coherence, contribute to identifying and eliminating overlaps and unnecessary red tape, and support parliamentary scrutiny of AI deployment across the EU; |
| 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, fundamental freedoms and the right to privacy, and for parliamentary support for the analysis of relevant AI developments affecting democratic processes, including the use of AI in political communication and public discourse, considering that AI-powered applications increasingly shape political communication, electoral processes, public discourse and decision-making, including through deepfakes, synthetic media and coordinated disinformation campaigns; stresses the need to enforce the AI Act’s transparency obligations regarding AI-generated content in this regard; recognises that AI can also enhance democratic participation, improve access to information and strengthen evidence-based policymaking, while underlining the need to ensure that its use remains transparent, accountable and consistent with EU law; |
| 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, while also highlighting the need to ensure transparency and reduce regulatory complexity; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 21a. Stresses that in the short to medium term, the rapid progress of AI developments is reflected at the regulatory level by the newly adopted AI Act, which is yet to become fully applicable and the impact of which is yet to be fully observed; emphasises that the latest advancements in AI are also being addressed through the Digital Omnibus on AI, in response to the need for the simplification and clarification of certain provisions of the AI Act through a number of targeted measures to ensure its timely, smooth and proportionate implementation; highlights the fact that the Digital Omnibus on AI reflects the need to adapt to the quick pace of AI development and to ensure that the EU’s legal framework fosters an efficient and competitive environment for organisations operating in the EU; recalls the separate proposal for the Digital Omnibus, further clarifying how personal data may be used for AI training and development; underlines, in this context, the need to implement and enforce the AI Act and the rest of the EU’s digital legislative framework, and where necessary, of updating it in the light of technological developments, while avoiding unnecessary administrative burdens, overlapping reporting obligations and national gold-plating measures that could fragment the internal market and hinder the scaling-up of trustworthy European AI solutions; stresses the need for a transparent approach in this regard; |
Annex: declaration of input 4 blocks
Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that he included in his report input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that he received, in the preparation of the draft report, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register1, or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:
| 1. Interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register |
| Pour Demain Europe TI 172933491707-16 |
Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that he has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament's Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.
Procedure pages and committee votes
How the committees handled the text and how their members voted on it. Collapsed.
Final vote by roll call by the committee asked for opinion 7 blocks
66 · For
- ECR
- Alessandro Ciriani, Geadis Geadi, Paolo Inselvini, Assita Kanko, Georgiana Teodorescu, Maciej Wasik
- No group
- Erik Kalinák
- EPP
- Georgios Aftias, Krzysztof Brejza, Caterina Chinnici, Paulo Cunha, Lena Düpont, Loucas Fourlas, Ondrej Kolár, Marie-Sophie Lanig, Jeroen Lenaers, Verena Mertens, Ana Miguel Pedro, Emil Radev, Karlo Ressler, Bartlomiej Sienkiewicz, Tomas Tobé, Loránt Vincze, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Javier Zarzalejos, Tomás Zdechovský
- Patriots
- Jaroslav Bzoch, Mélanie Disdier, Marieke Ehlers, Catherine Griset, András László, Fabrice Leggeri, António Tânger Corrêa, Tom Vandendriessche
- Renew
- Malik Azmani, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihonová, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Fabienne Keller, Moritz Körner, Michael McNamara, Marjan Sarec, Hilde Vautmans, Lucia Yar
- S&D
- Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, Francisco Assis, Katarina Barley, Hannes Heide, Alicia Homs Ginel, Evin Incir, Murielle Laurent, Ana Catarina Mendes, Birgit Sippel, Krzysztof Smiszek, Cecilia Strada, Kristian Vigenin, Alessandro Zan
- The Left
- Giuseppe Antoci, Pernando Barrena Arza, Gaetano Pedulla', Ilaria Salis
- Greens
- Jaume Asens Llodrà, Saskia Bricmont, Mélissa Camara, Markéta Gregorová, Leoluca Orlando, Tineke Strik
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). “OPINION on institutional aspects of artificial intelligence in the context of European integration”. Text, 24 June 2026. docId LIBE-AD-787655. EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/LIBE-AD-787655 (retrieved 25 September 2026). Data: EP Open Data API: document record, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/api/v2/documents/LIBE-AD-787655 (CC BY 4.0).
BibTeX
@misc{epw-text-libe-ad-787655,
author = {{European Parliament}},
title = {{OPINION on institutional aspects of artificial intelligence in the context of European integration}},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-06-24},
howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/LIBE-AD-787655}},
url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/LIBE-AD-787655},
urldate = {2026-09-25},
publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
note = {Text. docId LIBE-AD-787655. Data: EP Open Data API: document record (CC BY 4.0)}
}