We Publish Our Third Study on the AI Act, Focusing on Article 5 & Prohibited Practices
Today, Homo Digitalis publishes its third study on Regulation 2024/1689, the now widely known AI Act, titled “Artificial Intelligence Act: Analysis of Provisions on Prohibited Practices in Article 5 of Regulation 2024/1689.”
The authors of this study are Sophia Antonopoulou, Lamprini Gyftokosta, Tania Skrapaliori, Eleftherios Chelioudakis, and Stavroula Chousou.
The aim of this Homo Digitalis analysis is to systematically approach each provision of Article 5 of the AI Regulation, related to Manipulative or deceptive techniques, Exploitation of vulnerabilities, Assessment of social behavior, Facial recognition database use, Prediction of criminal offenses, Emotion detection,Biometric categorization systems, and Remote biometric identification.
With our study, we provide targeted questions highlighting the critical aspects of individual provisions, identifying the so-called “gray areas”—points that present ambiguities, overlaps, or potential interpretative challenges. We substantiate our concerns with specific examples and pose precise questions to be addressed by the upcoming guidelines of the European Commission’s AI Office and the national legislator.
As with our first two studies (published in October and November 2024, respectively), our third study also aims to support the Ministry of Digital Governance in its mission to transpose the AI Act into Greek legislation. Additionally, through our detailed analyses and arguments, we aim to contribute to the maturation of public discourse and empower more Civil Society organizations to actively participate in it.
You can read our study, “Artificial Intelligence Act: Analysis of Provisions on Prohibited Practices in Article 5 of Regulation 2024/1689,” (available in EL) here.
Homo Digitalis participated in AI Office’s consultation on Prohibited Practices under the AI Act
In November 2024, the European Commission’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) Office launched a consultation on AI Act prohibitions and AI system definition.
The guidelines under development will help national competent authorities as well as providers and deployers in complying with the AI Act’s rules on such AI practices ahead of the application of the relevant provisions on 2 February 2025.
Homo Digitalis participated in this public consultation process by submitting our input, in an attempt to highlight challenges and provide further clarity on practical aspects and use cases.
The authors’ team of our public consultation is composed of our Director on Human Rights & Artificial Intelligence, Lamprini Gyftokosta and our members Sophia Antonopoulou and Stavrina Chousou.
You can read our input here.
Stay tuned, since our dedicated report on the AI Act and its provisions on Prohibited Practices is to be published soon!
We publish our Second AI Act Study on market surveillance authorities and the AI governance ecosystem
Today Homo Digitalis publishes its second study on Regulation 2024/1689, the now well-known AI Act, entitled “AI Act: Analysis of Provisions for AI Governance and Competent Market Surveillance Authorities“.
The writing team for the study consists of Homo Digitalis’ Director of Human Rights and AI, Lamprini Gyftokosta, and our member Niki Georgakopoulou.
The purpose of this Homo Digitalis analysis is to highlight some of the critical issues raised by the implementation of the AI governance system provisions, taking into account national structures as well as the civil society perspective.
More specifically, in this analysis we answer the following questions:
- What governance structure does the Regulation propose for AI?
- What does the concept of ‘market surveillance authority’ mean for the AI Regulation?
- What is in Regulation 2019/1020 and why should we consider its provisions together with the AI Act?
- Which Greek authorities meet the requirements set out in the two Regulations and why?
- What governance models have been adopted or are under discussion in other jurisdictions at this time?
- What are our main concerns?
- What are our main suggestions for improvement?
We recall that on 12 November, the Department for Digital Government took the first official step in implementing the AI Act by publishing the list of national authorities for the protection of fundamental rights. These principles include: The Data Protection Authority, the Ombudsman, the Communications Privacy Authority and the National Human Rights Commission.
In this regard, as early as 25 October, with our first Study “Analysis and proposals for the incorporation of the provisions on impact assessment on fundamental rights in Greece“, we had already presented detailed proposals on this issue. If you did not have time to read our Study, we invite you to see the one-page summary we prepared, specifically for the National Fundamental Rights Authorities.
The Ministry’s publication was only the first step. The next critical obligation is the institutional design of the market surveillance authorities, which must be completed by August 2, 2025, in accordance with Article 113 of the Regulation.
The second Study that we are publishing today is precisely intended to assist the Ministry of Digital Governance, which has the task of carrying out the difficult task of synthesizing this ecosystem in Greece, but also, with our detailed analyses and arguments, to help mature the public debate and enable more civil society organizations to actively participate in it.
We publish our first detailed study of the AI Act and the provisions of the FRIAs
Homo Digitalis publishes today its first Study on the European Regulation on Artificial Intelligence entitled “Artificial Intelligence Act: Analysis and proposals for the incorporation of the provisions on fundamental rights impact assessment in Greece”.
The authors of this first Study are our member Sophia Antonopoulou and Homo Digitalis’ Director of Human Rights & Artificial Intelligence, Lamprini Gyftokosta.
The Study is the first of a series of analyses that we will be publishing in the near future on various important provisions of the AI Regulation, which aim both to inform decision makers in Greece about important provisions of the AI Act in order to assist in its successful implementation, and to frame the public debate on AI in Greece by providing specific arguments and proposals.
The focus of the first Homo Digitalis Study is to highlight some critical issues raised by the implementation of the provisions on AI in the Fundamental Rights (FRR), from the perspective of civil society. Besides, it aims to contribute constructively to the public debate by proposing concrete solutions for an effective impact assessment process with regard to high-risk AI systems.
In summary, the main conclusions of the Study include the following concerns:
- The exclusion from the obligation to carry out NRAs of AI systems used exclusively by private services.
- The complete lack of sanctions for those who violate the provisions on TDRs.
- The ambiguities and interpretative gaps regarding how to carry out an ERA, the updating of data and the re-conducting of an ERA, the risk assessment and proposed measures, the notification of the market surveillance authority and the exemptions from such notification of the market surveillance authority; and
- The lack of transparency in the use of AI systems and the preparation of SIAs in the areas of law enforcement, migration and asylum management and border control.
It also summarises the proposals for improvement in five key points that are crucial for the effective protection of fundamental rights against any violations of AI systems:
- It is proposed to exercise discretion under Article 99(2) and to introduce sanctions for non-compliance with the provisions on AI practices. It is further proposed that the relevant sanctions should be on the same scale as those for non-compliance with the prohibition of AI practices under Article 99(3) of the Regulation.
- It is proposed to establish detailed governance arrangements with clear procedures for handling complaints and appeals and to ensure stakeholder participation in the Greek law that will incorporate the Regulation.
- Amend Law 4780/2021, the provisions of which govern the functioning of the National Human Rights Commission to assume the role under Article 77 of the Regulation under certain conditions.
- In addition to the template for conducting a NCHR, it is necessary to develop guidelines, including an extensive analysis of Recital 96,Articles 6(2), 27, 43, 46, 49 and 77 of the AI Regulation.
You can read the Homo Digitalis Study in detail here.
Homo Digitalis participates in the European Commission's Open Consultation on General-Purpose AI
Yesterday, 18/9 Homo Digitalis submitted its responses to the European Commission’s Open Consultation under the title “FUTURE-PROOF AI ACT: TRUSTWORTHY GENERAL-PURPOSE AI”. The consultation covered issues concerning the future implementation of the AI ACT legislation and how to make the use of General-Purpose AI models trustworthy.
Homo Digitalis’ position paper on the Consultation was prepared by our organisation’s AI & Human Rights Director, Lamprini Gyftokosta and our member Tania Skrapaliori
You can read our statement here.
Civil Society Common Statement: United Against Spyware Abuse in the EU and Beyond
Spyware isn’t just a privacy issue — it’s a threat to the very foundations of our democratic values. By undermining independent decision-making, restricting public debate, and silencing journalists and activists, spyware erodes the pillars of a healthy civic space.
As new European Union institutions prepare to take office following the EU elections, the growing threat of spyware has become a pressing global concern that demands immediate attention.
On Tuesday 3/9, Homo Digitalis joined Center for Democracy and Technology Europe (CDT Europe), alongside 30 civil society and journalists' organisations in publishing a joint statement urging the incoming EU institutions to prioritise action against the misuse of spyware in the new legislative term.
Some of our coalition’s key recommendations include:
- A ban on the production, sale, and use of spyware that disproportionately harms fundamental rights.
- Stronger export controls to prevent the misuse of these technologies beyond the EU.
- Transparency and accountability in government contracts involving spyware.
As Silvia Lorenzo Perez, Director of CDT Europe’s Security, Surveillance & Human Rights Programme, puts it: "The incoming EU institutions have the opportunity to correct the failures of the last legislature by taking concrete and decisive action against the abuse of spyware surveillance."
The new EU institutions must seize this moment to restore public trust, protect our fundamental rights, and uphold the values that define the Union.
You can read the EN version of the letter here, and the EL version of the letter here.
Homo Digitalis has also addressed related concerns, before the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights in a recent Open Letter submitted in August. You can read more about this here.
We submitted an Open Letter to the Special Secretary of Foresight Strategy about the National AI Strategy and the enforcement of the AI Act
Today, 1/8/2024, on the occasion of the entry into force of the AI Act, Homo Digitalis sent a letter to the Special Secretary of Foresight Strategy of the Hellenic Government, Mr. Giannis Mastrogiorgiou, regarding the National Strategy for AI and the incorporation of the AI Act into national law! In addition, we communicated our concerns to the Prime Minister’s Office and the Ministry of Digital Governance.
Among other things, we raise critical questions about the national governance and oversight model, the creation of regulatory sandboxes (No. 57) and how the Greek public will be informed when subjected to the use of AI systems that create profiles or make decisions about them in the provision of public services.
At Homo Digitalis, we believe that the next steps of the Greek government will be crucial for the effective or not defence of digital rights in Greece, at a time when AI is a reality in our daily lives. The proper incorporation of such a technical and legally complex legislation into national law and the solutions adopted to address the ethical and social issues that arise are crucial for all of us.
You can see the full text of our letter here.
We submitted our report to the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to education regarding the use of AI in education
The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to education, Ms Farida Shaheed is preparing her upcoming report for the UN General Assembly in October 2024 on the promotion of the right to education based on artificial intelligence tools.
Homo Digitalis, after completing a tour of schools and conversations with teachers, students and parents, believes that the contribution of civil society with a practical look at this issue is important!
For this reason we have submitted our report before her on Monday 27 May. We would like to thank Anastasios and Viliy Karagiorgou and Lamprini Gyftokosta for their important contribution to the drafting and filing of this report!
Our joint action on the Digital Euro & Right to Cash legislative initiatives
At the end of February, together with epicenter.works, European Digital Rights and other important civil society organisations, we sent a letter to the MEPs who are the rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs of the DigitalEuro and Right To Cash packages.
Despite the fact that both proposed pieces of legislation are part of the same legislative package, we see that the relevant negotiations are moving at two different speeds!
With the European elections approaching and uncertainty prevailing regarding the proposed legislation on the Digital Euro and the challenges that arise with its technical features, we call on MEPs to separate these two legislative proposals in order to spend the necessary time to solve the problems that have been identified and highlighted by academics, and other experts in the field.
You can view our joint letter here.