Poland is carrying out preparatory work to adapt local laws to the requirements of the EU law on artificial intelligence (AI law). In recent weeks, the Ministry of Digital Affairs has held preliminary talks with around 50 companies, including Hogan Lovells Warsaw, to achieve this goal. Most of these companies believe Poland needs to set up completely new authorities to carry out the tasks of the AI Act.
In recent weeks, prior to the AI Act's entry into force, the Ministry of Digital Affairs has focused on obtaining the opinion of the Working Group on Artificial Intelligence (GRAI) on these four issues related to the establishment of authorities.
1. Should the application of the AI Act lead to the creation of a new market supervisory authority, or should it be carried out by the existing authorities?
Most of the participating institutions supported establishing a new authority and emphasized the need to provide the necessary infrastructure, technical, financial, and human resources to effectively perform the tasks under the AI Act.
However, a minority of respondents suggested that the powers of the Market Surveillance Authority could be transferred to an existing institution, such as the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, the President of the Office for Personal Data Protection, the President of the Financial Supervision Commission, the President of the National Broadcasting Council, the President of the Office of Electronic Communications or the Minister of Digital Affairs.
2. Should the function of notifying authority be performed by an existing authority or a new authority explicitly created for this purpose?
The answers to this question varied widely, but a slight majority felt that it would be more beneficial to transfer the function of notifying authority to a new authority and thus promote AI in the country.
Others thought the Polish Accreditation Center would be best suited to become a notifying authority.
3. Should the functions of the market surveillance authority and the notifying authority be performed by the same institution or independent authorities?
A small majority of participants in the pre-consultation thought it would be better if one and the same institution in Poland performed the functions of the market surveillance authority and the notifying authority.
In Warsaw, Hogan Lovells took the opposite position and argued that the functions of the market surveillance authority and the notifying authority should be assigned to independent organizations.
4. Who should have priority in communication and awareness-raising activities related to the application of the AI Act?
Respondents' attention was primarily focused on entities such as businesses, including high-risk AI providers, public administration, researchers, students, consumers, creators, artists, financial sector institutions, and HCPs.
Further consultations on adapting an appropriate legal framework for AI in Poland are expected in the coming months.
