Fundamental Rights Impact Assessments in the EU’s AI Act: A teleological and contextual analysis of the obligations of deployers
Abstract
This article examines the obligation for public-sector deployers to conduct Fundamental Rights Impact Assessments (FRIAs) under Article 27 of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act). The article argues that the FRIA obligation functions as a minimum harmonisation standard, granting Member State authorities discretion to go beyond the AI Act's baseline and conduct more rigorous fundamental rights scrutiny prior to deployment. In contrast, the AI Act's obligations on providers of high-risk AI systems are fully harmonised, primarily structured around internal market objectives and designed to facilitate the free circulation of AI technologies across the EU. By drawing a distinction between these two regulatory logics, the article demonstrates that decisions by public authorities not to deploy AI, or to conduct broader or deeper FRIA impact assessments than required by Article 27, fall outside the scope of EU law. Drawing a parallel with free movement of goods caselaw, the article argues that such decisions are akin to ‘selling arrangements’. Consequently, they are not subject to challenge under internal market or fundamental rights provisions of EU law by affected providers. The article concludes that the FRIA mechanism offers Member States a critical lever to secure fundamental rights and foster human-centric and trustworthy AI.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
EJLT is an open access journal, aiming to disseminate academic work and perspectives as widely as possible to the benefit of the author and the author’s readers. It is the assumption of the EJLT that authors who publish in the journal wish their work to be available as freely and as widely as possible through the open access publishing channel.
Authors who publish with EJLT will retain copyright and moral rights in the underlying work but will grant all users the rights to copy, store and print for non-commercial use copies of their work. Commercial mirroring may also be carried out with the consent of the journal. The work must remain as published – without redaction or editing – and must clearly state the identity of the author and the originating EJLT url of the article. Any commercial use of the author’s work - apart from mirroring - requires the permission of the author and any aspects of the article which are the property of EJLT (e.g. typographical format) requires permission from EJLT.
Authors can sometimes become no longer contactable (through, for example, death or retirement). If this occurs, any rights in the work will pass to the European Journal of Law and Technology which will continue to make the work available in as wide a manner as possible to achieve the aims of open access and ensuring that an author's work continues to be available. An author - or their estate - can recover these rights from EJLT by providing contact information.
The European Journal of Law and Technology holds rights in format, publication and dissemination.
EJLT, as a non-commercial organisation - which receives donations to allow it to continue publishing – must retain information on reader access to journal articles. This means that we will not give permission to mirror the journal unless we can be provided with full details as to reader access to each and every journal article. We prefer and encourage deep linking rather than mirroring. Encouragement is thus given for all users – commercial and non-commercial – to provide indexes and links to articles in the EJLT where the index or link points to the location of the article on the EJLT server, rather than to stored copies on other servers.
Please contact the European Journal of Law and Technology if you are in any doubt as to what this statement of use covers.