What changed

PA_Legam

18.3.2026

AMENDMENTS

Ms Anna Cavazzini

The Committee on Culture and Education submits the following to the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, as the committees responsible:

Chair

Amendment 1

Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection

Proposal for a regulation

BRUSSELS

Recital 2 a (new)

Mr Javier Zarzalejos

Text proposed by the Commission

Chair

Amendment

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

(2a) Effective implementation of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 requires that the adjustments introduced to facilitate its application in practice do not reduce the clarity and accessibility of the regulatory framework for those required to apply it. In particular, where the Regulation is applied in the fields of education, culture and media, a clear understanding of the obligations and safeguards related to the use of AI systems remains essential to ensure its effective and consistent application, with a particular attention given to rightholders from the cultural and creative sectors. The measures introduced to support timely and proportionate compliance with this Regulation should therefore continue to support clarity and accessibility of its requirements, thereby contributing to informed use of AI systems and trust in their deployment.

BRUSSELS

Amendment 2

Subject: Opinion on 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 – C10-0304/2025– 2025/0359(COD))

Proposal for a regulation

Dear Chairs,

Recital 3

Under the procedure referred to above, the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) has been asked to submit an opinion to the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. At their meeting of 11 February 2026, TRAN Coordinators decided to send the opinion in the form of a letter. TRAN adopted the following opinion at its meeting of 18 March 2026.

Text proposed by the Commission

General Remarks

Amendment

1. The Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) welcomes the objective of simplification under the Digital Omnibus on artificial intelligence (AI), hereafter ‘AI Omnibus’, and recognises the need to support a risk-based EU regulatory framework that is operational and innovation-friendly, while maintaining effective safeguards to ensure that AI systems are safe, transparent, accountable and respectful of fundamental rights.

(3) Consequently, targeted amendments to Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 are necessary to address certain implementation challenges, with a view to the effective application of the relevant rules.

2. Technological innovation in the EU transport sector is essential to strengthen its global competitiveness, to deliver safe, efficient, and sustainable transport systems for citizens and businesses, and to contribute to improved working conditions for the millions of workers who underpin the European mobility system.

(3) Consequently, targeted amendments to Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 are necessary to address certain implementation challenges, with a view to the effective application of the relevant rules. As AI systems are increasingly used in education and in the cultural and creative sectors, their deployment might raise specific considerations linked to learning processes, cultural expression and media pluralism. When applying this Regulation, particular attention should therefore be paid to these sectors in order to support informed use of AI and maintain trust in its deployment. In the field of education, this specifically requires safeguards to ensure that the deployment of AI systems preserves pedagogical autonomy, guarantees high standards of data privacy for learners, and prevents dependency on proprietary ecosystems (vendor lock-in).

3. AI is emerging as an important enabling technology to support EU transport policy objectives. AI is not a new phenomenon in the transport sector as it has been embedded in driver assistance systems, traffic management and operational optimisation tools for many years now. Examples of safety relevant systems already in use or in project phases include predictive maintenance systems in all transport modes, risk prediction and foreign object detection on runways in aviation, on track obstacle detection and train positioning in rail, autonomous vessels and collision detection systems in the maritime sector as well as advanced driver assistance systems and automated driving in road transport. Its role is expected to expand further, where it demonstrably contributes to improvements in safety and efficiency. In tourism, AI is reshaping the interaction between consumers, intermediaries and businesses.

Amendment 3

Impact of the AI Omnibus on transport

Proposal for a regulation

4. The AI Omnibus introduces amendments to two key pieces of legislation: the AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), which sets the regulatory framework for the use of AI across the EU, and the EASA Basic Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2018/1139) to ensure that AI integration in aviation maintains the highest standards of safety, efficiency, and accountability.

Recital 5

5. The extension of regulatory privileges from small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to small-mid cap companies (SMCs) helps smaller and innovative EU companies active in AI-enabled transport systems, to scale up beyond the start-up phase without facing increased compliance burdens.

Text proposed by the Commission

6. The extension of real-world testing possibilities to AI systems covered by Annex I, Section B, has a direct operational impact on transport. For technologies such as automated vehicles, exposure to complex traffic environments is essential to achieve technological maturity and for validating safety performance under real-world conditions. Facilitating these controlled operational scenarios is a decisive step toward accelerating the innovation cycle and the subsequent deployment of AI across European transport networks. They complement regulatory sandboxes by enabling a progression from controlled testing environments to real-world conditions once safety has been demonstrated. This approach strengthens public and consumer confidence and supports the rapid development and market uptake of innovative AI applications.

Amendment

7. The Committee welcomes the amendments proposed by the AI Omnibus to the EASA Basic Regulation. These amendments would ensure that the existing safeguards for the use of high-risk AI systems, as set out in Chapter III, Section 2 of Regulation 2024/1689, also apply to delegated or implementing acts provided for in seven additional articles of the EASA Regulation (Articles 27, 31, 32, 36, 39, 50 and 53). Despite the recent adoption of the AI Act , this update is necessary in light of the accelerating evolution of AI technologies and their potential deployment in additional civil aviation domains, including, for example, the medical assessment of air traffic controllers, ground-handling services and training.

(5) Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 currently imposes an obligation on all providers and deployers of AI systems to ensure AI literacy of their staff. AI literacy development starting from education and training and continuing in a lifelong learning manner is crucial to equip providers, deployers and other affected persons with the necessary notions to make informed decisions regarding AI systems deployment. However, experience shared by stakeholders reveals that a one-size-fits-all solution is not suitable for all types of providers and deployers in relation to the promotion of AI literacy, rendering such a horizontal obligation ineffective in achieving the objective pursued by this provision. Moreover, data indicate that imposing such an obligation creates an additional compliance burden, particularly for smaller enterprises, whereas AI literacy should be a strategic priority, regardless of regulatory obligations and potential sanctions. In light of that, Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 should be amended to require the Member States and the Commission, without prejudice to their respective competences, to individually, collectively and in cooperation with relevant stakeholders encourage providers and deployers to provide a sufficient level of AI literacy of their staff and other persons dealing with the operation and use of AI systems on their behalf, including through offering training opportunities, providing informational resources, and allowing exchange of good practices and other non-legally binding initiatives. The European Artificial Intelligence Board (‘Board’) will ensure recurrent exchange between the Commission and Member States on the topic, while the Apply AI Alliance will allow discussion with the wider community. This amendment is without prejudice to the broader measures taken by the Commission and the Member States to promote AI literacy and competences for the wider population, including learners, students, and citizens at different ages and in particular through education and training systems.

8. Considering these points, the Committee stresses that swift adoption of the updated legal framework is essential to ensure legal certainty and a simplified regulatory environment.

deleted

9. TRAN notes that, given that most transport systems already fall under sectoral Union harmonization legislation, the effective implementation of AI safeguards will largely depend on how these requirements interact with and are integrated into existing regulatory frameworks and supervisory practices. It underlines that differences in regulatory structures and capacities across transport modes and Member States may result in uneven application of AI-related safeguards.

Amendment 4

AI’s potential for the transport and tourism sectors

Proposal for a regulation

10. AI’s success as a key technology for the future of the transport and tourism sectors, contributing to important safety and efficiency gains must also go hand in hand with careful consideration of its social and environmental impacts. In particular, the use of natural resources and the outsourcing of skills and jobs outside Europe are important factors that should be taken into account when evaluating the overall cost–benefit of AI deployment in the sector.

Recital 5 a (new)

Risks and safeguards

Text proposed by the Commission

11. The contribution of AI to safety and sustainability will depend on responsible deployment, effective oversight and alignment with broader transport and tourism policy objectives. While AI can support efficiency gains in transport operations, its overall environmental impact must be carefully assessed.

Amendment

12. The increasing integration of AI systems into transport and tourism operations represents not only technological innovation but also changes in the organisation of work, including the potential to optimise workflows and reduce routine or repetitive tasks. Automated driving systems and remote supervision models may significantly reshape the roles of drivers, dispatchers and operational staff, including through the emergence of remote monitoring, operation or control functions that can be performed from anywhere in the world.

(5a) The promotion of AI literacy plays an important role in supporting citizens’ understanding of AI and its impact on society, including awareness of the opportunities and risks associated with AI, in particular the ability to identify and counter algorithmic bias, discrimination, and the amplification of disinformation, thereby contributing to its democratic governance and public oversight. In practice, such understanding is fostered through education, training, skilling and reskilling programmes, as well as through culture, media literacy and public awareness initiatives. These broader initiatives complement the organisational AI literacy measures taken by providers and deployers of AI systems for their staff and other persons acting on their behalf. Member States should therefore be encouraged, in the context of promoting AI literacy, to involve education providers, cultural institutions, media organisations and civil society actors, in order to ensure that AI literacy initiatives are accessible, inclusive and adapted to different audiences and age groups.

13. As AI deployment progresses, it is important to consider its implications for work organisation, workforce skills and job profiles. Any organisational changes, including new operational and outsourcing models involving third countries, should ensure that the development of AI in the sector does not lead to the relocation of skills and jobs outside the Union and should contribute to upholding high working conditions and standards. Maintaining and developing a strong EU-based jobs and skills ecosystem within the EU is essential to supporting the Union’s strategic autonomy and competitiveness.

Amendment 5

Access to funding, capital and scale-up capabilities to support EU AI innovation

Proposal for a regulation

14. While the Committee notes that several initiatives exist at EU level that aim to stimulate and accelerate AI innovation in key industrial sectors, particularly in terms of autonomous driving, such as the European Connected and Autonomous Vehicle Alliance and the Autonomous Drive Ambition Cities initiative announced in the Apply AI strategy to accelerate autonomous vehicle deployment, important barriers in accessing capital may hinder European companies from scaling up their businesses to compete on a par with other global companies.

Recital 5 b (new)

15. While Europe has strong industrial players and innovative technology firms, many companies in AI and transport automation remain in the start-up, early scale-up phase or leave the EU at an early stage. TRAN therefore calls on the Commission and the Member States to examine instruments and mechanisms allowing public-private partnerships and incentivising venture capital to bridge the gap between the start-up and SME phase, while ensuring that public and private investment promotes energy-efficient, safe, interoperable and open AI solutions that strengthen sustainability, resilience and Europe’s technological sovereignty.

Text proposed by the Commission

Strategic autonomy

Amendment

16. Given that the AI Act, notably its rules on high-risk systems, affects transport, TRAN calls for coherence with EU transport objectives and digital sovereignty. As AI increasingly becomes integral to critical transport infrastructure, safeguards are needed to protect data sovereignty, avoid strategic dependencies and ensure enforceability of EU law.

(5b) AI literacy, together with media and digital literacy, is especially important for children and young people, who are often exposed to AI systems from an early age without sufficient awareness of bias, inaccuracies, or misleading outputs, and of the effects such systems may have on trust in information, privacy, and the shaping of opinions and behaviour. Measures to promote these literacies should support critical thinking, digital autonomy, and informed decision-making, and should be tailored to different ages and learning contexts.

17. In procurement for critical infrastructure, authorities should be able to require interoperable solutions, effective cyber security and operational control within the Union to ensure strategic security of supply and resilience.

Amendment 6

National fragmentation

Proposal for a regulation

18. The Committee emphasises that the EU type-approval framework (Regulation (EU) 2018/858) and the General Safety Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2019/2144) provide a strong harmonised safety regime for the deployment of automated driving and other AI-enabled transport systems.

Recital 5 c (new)

19. The extension of real-world testing in the AI Omnibus is a welcome step that creates greater opportunities for innovation. Well-designed safeguards help uphold safety standards while reinforcing trust in new AI technologies. Divergent national or regional testing and operational regimes may continue to hinder large-scale testing and deployment. Further harmonisation and convergence would strengthen legal certainty and the functioning of the internal market. Supporting the EU transport sector in fully benefiting from Europe’s increasing digital competitiveness and more integrated data ecosystems is a priority.

Text proposed by the Commission

Yours sincerely,

Amendment

Elissavet VozembergVrionidi

(5c) Artificial intelligence is increasingly present in the digital environments used by children and young people, including in education, social media, online gaming, and cultural and creative platforms. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 should therefore be applied in a manner that reflects how children and young people interact with AI systems and their specific need for protection and age-appropriate information.

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6a) AI systems that alter, manipulate or artificially produce images or videos depicting natural persons engaged in sexually explicit activities, displaying their intimate body parts, or undresses a person without consent cause harm to victims and violate fundamental rights to dignity and privacy. Recent developments have demonstrated the incompatibility of certain AI practices with the Union's fundamental rights framework. The nudification of women, manipulation of intimate images and generation of child sexual abuse material constitute clear breaches of fundamental rights and Union law. However, significant legal uncertainty remains as to whether AI-powered nudity applications fall within the scope of the AI practices prohibited by Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. Article 112 of that Regulation obliges the Commission to assess, on an annual basis, the necessity of amendments to the list of prohibited practices laid down in Article 5 and the list set out in Annex III, and to submit the findings of that assessment to the European Parliament and the Council. The Commission has failed to meet the deadline for the previous assessment period. For this reason, it seems adequate to specify that prohibited practices under Article 5 include the placing on the market, the putting into service or the use of an AI system that can generate or manipulate sexualised audio, images and videos of individuals, thereby facilitating non-consensual sharing of intimate or manipulated material as defined in Directive (EU) 2024/1385.

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) To streamline compliance and reduce the associated costs, providers of AI systems should not be required to register AI systems referred to in Article 6(3) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 in the EU database pursuant to Article 49(2) of that Regulation. Given that such systems are not considered high-risk under certain conditions where they do not pose significant risk of harm to the health, safety or fundamental rights of persons, imposing registration requirements would constitute a disproportionate compliance burden. Nevertheless, a provider who considers that an AI system falls under Article 6(3) remains obligated to document its assessment before that system is placed on the market or put into service. This assessment may be requested by national competent authorities.

deleted

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11a) Extending opportunities for real-world testing can support innovation, but it should not result in vulnerable groups becoming default test populations. Where real-world testing involves AI systems intended for use in education and vocational training, or is carried out in environments where minors are likely to be affected, the real-world testing plan should set out safeguards that are specific to that setting, including clear information for affected persons and meaningful involvement of deployers such as schools and other public-interest organisations responsible for those environments.

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 20

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(20) To allow sufficient time for providers of generative AI systems subject to the marking obligations laid down in Article 50(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 to adapt their practices within a reasonable time without disrupting the market, it is appropriate to introduce a transitional period of 6 months for providers who have already placed their systems on the market before the 2 August 2026.

deleted

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 21

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(21) To provide sufficient time for providers of high-risk AI systems and to clarify applicable rules to the AI systems already placed on the market or put into service before the entry into application of relevant provisions of the Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, it is appropriate to clarify the application of a grace period provided in Article 111(2) of that Regulation. The grace period, for the purpose of Article 111(2), should apply to a type and model of AI systems already placed in the market. This means that if at least one individual unit of the high-risk AI system has been lawfully placed on the market or put into service before the date specified in Article 111(2), other individual units of the same type and model of high-risk AI system are subject to the grace period provided in Article 111(2) and thus may continue to be placed on the market, made available or put into service on the Union market without any additional obligations, requirements or the need for additional certification, as long as the design of that high-risk AI system remains unchanged. For the purposes of application of the grace period provided in Article 111(2), the decisive factor is the date on which the first unit of that type and model of high-risk AI system was placed on the market or put into service on the Union market for the first time. Any significant change to the design of that AI system after the date specified in Article 111(2) should trigger the obligation of the provider to comply fully with all relevant provisions of this Regulation applicable to high-risk AI systems, including the conformity assessment requirements.

deleted

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 22

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(22) Article 113 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 establishes the dates of entry into force and application of that Regulation, notably that the general date of application is 2 August 2026. For the obligations related to high-risk AI systems laid down in Sections 1, 2 and 3 of Chapter III of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, the delayed availability of standards, common specifications, and alternative guidance and the delayed establishment of national competent authorities lead to challenges that jeopardise those obligation’s effective entry into application and that risk to significantly increase implementation costs in a way that does not justify maintaining their initial date of application, namely 2 August 2026. Building on experience, it is appropriate to put in place a mechanism that links the entry into application to the availability of measures in support of compliance with Chapter III, which may include harmonised standards, common specifications, and Commission guidelines. This should be confirmed by the Commission by decision, following which the rules obligations for high-risk AI systems should apply after 6 months as regards AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(2) and Annex III and after 12 months as regards AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(1) and Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. However, this flexibility should only be extended until 2 December 2027 as regards AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(2) and Annex III and until 2 August 2028 as regards AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(1) and Annex I to that Regulation, by which dates those rules should enter into application in any case. The distinction between the entry into application of the rules as regards AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(2) and Annex III and Article 6(1) and Annex I to that Regulation is consistent with the difference between the initial dates of application envisaged in Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 and aims to provide the necessary time for adaptation and implementation of the corresponding obligations.

deleted

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 23

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(23) In light of the objective to reduce implementation challenges for citizens, businesses and public administrations, it is essential that harmonised conditions for the implementation of certain rules are adopted only where strictly necessary. For that purpose, it is appropriate to remove certain empowerments bestowed on the Commission to adopt such harmonised conditions by means of implementing acts in cases where those conditions are not met. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 should therefore be amended to remove the empowerments conferred on the Commission in Article 50(7), Article 56(6), and Article 72(3) thereof to adopt implementing acts. The removal of the empowerment to adopt a harmonised template for a post-market monitoring plan in Article 72(3) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 has as an additional benefit that it will offer more flexibility for providers of high-risk AI systems to put in place a system for post-market monitoring that is tailored to their organisation. At the same time, recognising the need to offer clarity how providers of high-risk AI systems are required to comply, the Commission should be required to publish guidance.

(23) In light of the objective to reduce implementation challenges for citizens, businesses and public administrations, it is essential that harmonised conditions for the implementation of certain rules are adopted only where strictly necessary. For that purpose, it is appropriate to remove certain empowerments bestowed on the Commission to adopt such harmonised conditions by means of implementing acts in cases where those conditions are not met. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 should therefore be amended to remove the empowerments conferred on the Commission in Article 50(7), Article 56(6), and Article 72(3) thereof to adopt implementing acts. The removal of the empowerment to adopt a harmonised template for a post-market monitoring plan in Article 72(3) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 has as an additional benefit that it will offer more flexibility for providers of high-risk AI systems to put in place a system for post-market monitoring that is tailored to their organisation. At the same time, recognising the need to offer clarity how providers of high-risk AI systems are required to comply, the Commission should be required to publish guidance. In that context, codes of practice encouraged by the AI Office pursuant to Article 50(7) should, where relevant, provide guidance on how appropriate user information and awareness can be ensured in a proportionate manner, including in situations where AI systems present lower risks, in particular in education and training, media and information services, cultural and creative activities, or the provision of public services.

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4) Article 4 is replaced by the following:

deleted

‘Article 4

AI literacy

The Commission and Member States shall encourage providers and deployers of AI systems to take measures to ensure a sufficient level of AI literacy of their staff and other persons dealing with the operation and use of AI systems on their behalf, taking into account their technical knowledge, experience, level of education and training and the context the AI systems are to be used in, and considering the persons or groups of persons on whom the AI systems are to be used.’;

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 4a – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(fa) for the sole purpose of detecting and mitigating algorithmic biases that may affect media pluralism and the diversity of information, providers of high-risk AI systems used in the media ecosystem may, in exceptional and strictly limited circumstances, process special categories of personal data, provided that:

(i) such processing is strictly necessary and cannot be effectively achieved through the use of anonymised, aggregated or synthetic data;

(ii) the processing is limited in scope, duration and access, and does not lead to the identification, profiling or categorisation of individual users;

(iii) no inferences are drawn regarding political opinions, religious beliefs or other protected characteristics of natural persons;

(iv) appropriate technical and organisational measures are implemented in accordance with Union data protection law to ensure confidentiality, security and accountability;

(v) the personal data are deleted without undue delay once the bias has been detected and mitigated;

(vi) users are informed in a clear and accessible manner that their personal data may be processed, in exceptional circumstances, for the sole purpose of detecting and mitigating algorithmic biases, and are provided with information on the scope, safeguards, and rights applicable to such processing.

Amendment 16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 4a – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. Children's personal data is explicitly prohibited from being collected, processed or used any other way.

Amendment 17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 5 – paragraph 1– point h a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5a) In Article 5(1), the following point is added:

'(ha) the placing on the market, the putting into service or the use of an AI system that can alter, manipulate or generate images or videos so as to depict sexually explicit activities or the intimate parts of a natural person, or that undresses that person, and can facilitate non-consensual sharing of intimate or manipulated material as defined in Article 5 of Directive 2024/1385 1a.

_________________

1a Directive (EU) 2024/1385 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 on combating violence against women and domestic violence (OJ L, 2024/1385, 24.5.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1385/oj).’

Amendment 18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 6 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) in Article 6(4), paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

deleted

‘4. A provider who considers that an AI system referred to in Annex III is not high-risk shall document its assessment before that system is placed on the market or put into service. Upon request of national competent authorities, the provider shall provide the documentation of the assessment.’;

Amendment 19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 49 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14) in Article 49, paragraph 2 is deleted;

deleted

Amendment 20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 50 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7. The AI Office shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of codes of practice at Union level to facilitate the effective implementation of the obligations regarding the detection, marking and labelling of artificially generated or manipulated content. The Commission may assess whether adherence to those codes of practice is adequate to ensure compliance with the obligation laid down in paragraph 2, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 56(6), first subparagraph. If it deems the code is not adequate, the Commission may adopt an implementing act specifying common rules for the implementation of those obligations in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 98(2).

7. The AI Office shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of codes of practice at Union level to facilitate the effective implementation of the obligations regarding the detection, marking and labelling of artificially generated or manipulated content. The Commission may adopt implementing acts to approve those codes of practice in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 56(6). If it deems the code is not adequate, the Commission may adopt an implementing act specifying common rules for the implementation of those obligations in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 98(2). Those codes of practice shall, where relevant, address how appropriate user information and awareness can be ensured in a proportionate manner, including in cases where AI systems are considered to present lower risks, in particular when used in education and training, media and information services, cultural and creative activities, or the provision of public services.

Amendment 21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 56 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. The Commission and the Board shall regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of the objectives of the codes of practice by the participants and their contribution to the proper application of this Regulation. The Commission, taking utmost account of the opinion of the Board, shall assess whether the codes of practice cover the obligations provided for in Articles 53 and 55, and shall regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of their objectives. The Commission shall publish its assessment of the adequacy of the codes of practice.

6. The AI office and the Board shall regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of the objectives of the codes of practice by the participants and their contribution to the proper application of this Regulation. The AI office and the Board, taking utmost account of the opinion of the Board, shall assess whether the codes of practice cover the obligations provided for in Articles 53 and 55, and shall regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of their objectives. They shall publish their assessment of the adequacy of the codes of practice.

Justification

This amendment seeks to ensure that the monitoring, evaluation and disclosure of the adequacy of codes of practice are fully consistent with the governance arrangements set out in this Regulation. Entrusting these responsibilities to the AI Office and the Board places oversight in the hands of the bodies specifically mandated for technical supervision. In addition, restoring this role to the Board is necessary to maintain an appropriate institutional balance.

Amendment 22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 70 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. National competent authorities may provide guidance and advice on the implementation of this Regulation, in particular to SMCs and SMEs, including start-ups, taking into account the guidance and advice of the Board and the Commission, as appropriate. Whenever national competent authorities intend to provide guidance and advice with regard to an AI system in areas covered by other Union law, the national competent authorities under that Union law shall be consulted, as appropriate.

8. National competent authorities may provide guidance and advice on the implementation of this Regulation, in particular to SMCs and SMEs, including start-ups, and, where relevant, to public sector deployers, including local public authorities and publicly funded education, training and cultural institutions, taking into account the guidance and advice of the Board and the Commission, as appropriate. Whenever national competent authorities intend to provide guidance and advice with regard to an AI system in areas covered by other Union law, including data protection, consumer protection and audiovisual media services, the national competent authorities under that Union law shall be consulted, as appropriate.

Amendment 23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 72 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The post-market monitoring system shall be based on a post-market monitoring plan. The post-market monitoring plan shall be part of the technical documentation referred to in Annex IV. The Commission shall adopt guidance on the post-market monitoring plan.

3. The post-market monitoring system shall be based on a post-market monitoring plan. The post-market monitoring plan shall be part of the technical documentation referred to in Annex IV. The Commission shall adopt guidance on the post-market monitoring plan, including practical examples for high-risk AI systems deployed in education and vocational training and other public services, and on monitoring indicators that may signal adverse impacts on fundamental rights, including discriminatory outcomes.

Amendment 24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 95 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The AI Office and the Member States shall take into account the specific interests and needs of SMCs and SMEs, including start-ups, when encouraging and facilitating the drawing up of codes of conduct.

4. The AI Office and the Member States shall take into account the specific interests and needs of SMCs and SMEs, including start-ups, as well as the operational needs of local public authorities and public-interest organisations, including education, training and cultural institutions, where they are expected to use or benefit from such codes, when encouraging and facilitating the drawing up of codes of conduct.

Amendment 25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 28

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 96 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

When issuing such guidelines, the Commission shall pay particular attention to the needs of SMCs and SMEs including start-ups, of local public authorities and of the sectors most likely to be affected by this Regulation.

When issuing such guidelines, the Commission shall pay particular attention to the needs of SMCs and SMEs including start-ups, of local public authorities and of the sectors most likely to be affected by this Regulation, including education and vocational training, cultural and creative activities, and media and information services.

Amendment 26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 – point a

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 111 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Without prejudice to the application of Article 5 as referred to in Article 113(3), third paragraph, point (a), this Regulation shall apply to operators of high-risk AI systems, other than the systems referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, that have been placed on the market or put into service before the date of application of Chapter III and corresponding obligations referred to in Article 113, only if, as from that date, those systems are subject to significant changes in their designs. In any case, the providers and deployers of high-risk AI systems intended to be used by public authorities shall take the necessary steps to comply with the requirements and obligations laid down in this Regulation by 2 August 2030.

2. Without prejudice to the application of Article 5 as referred to in Article 113(3), third paragraph, point (a), this Regulation shall apply to deployers and providers of high-risk AI systems, other than the systems referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, that have been placed on the market or put into service before the date of application of Chapter III and corresponding obligations referred to in Article 113, only if, as from that date, those systems are subject to significant changes in their designs. In any case, the providers and deployers of high-risk AI systems intended to be used by public authorities shall take the necessary steps to comply with the requirements and obligations laid down in this Regulation by 2 August 2030.

Amendment 27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 – point b

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article111 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the following paragraph 4 is added:

deleted

‘4. Providers of AI systems, including general-purpose AI systems, generating synthetic audio, image, video or text content, that have been placed on the market before 2 August 2026 shall take the necessary steps in order to comply with Article 50(2) by 2 February 2027.

Amendment 28

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Article 113

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(31) Article 113 is amended as follows:

deleted

(a) in the third paragraph, point (d) is added:

‘(d) Chapter III, Sections 1, 2, and 3, shall apply following the adoption of a decision of the Commission confirming that adequate measures in support of compliance with Chapter III are available, from the following dates:

(i) 6 months after the adoption of that decision as regards AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(2) and Annex III, and

(ii) 12 months after the adoption of the decision as regards AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(1) and Annex I.

In the absence of the adoption of the decision within the meaning of subparagraph 1, or where the dates below are earlier than those that follow the adoption of that decision, Chapter III, Sections 1, 2, and 3, shall apply:

(i) on 2 December 2027 as regards AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(2) and Annex III, and

(ii) on 2 August 2028 as regards AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(1) and Annex I.;’

(b) in the third paragraph, point (e) is added:

‘(e) Articles 102 to 110 shall apply from [the date of entry into application of this Regulation].;’

Amendment 29

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 32

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(32) in Annex VIII, section B is deleted;

deleted

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

ThePursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for opinion declares underthat she included in her exclusiveopinion responsibilityinput on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that she didreceived, notin includethe inpreparation herof opinionthe inputopinion, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.embassies:

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

1. Interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register

Title

Bitkom e.V.

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)

Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs

References

Einride AB

COM(2025)0836 – C10-0304/2025 – 2025/0359(COD)

European Transport Safety Council

Committee(s) responsible

Robert Bosch GmbH

Date announced in plenary

TUI AG

IMCO

2. Representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies

19.1.2026

None

LIBE

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for opinion.

19.1.2026

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur for opinion declares that she 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.

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

CULT

19.1.2026

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Emma Rafowicz

20.1.2026

Rule 59 – Joint committee procedure

Date announced in plenary

19.1.2026

Discussed in committee

9.2.2026

Date adopted

5.3.2026

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

18

0

3

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols: