Cambridge Commentary on EU General-Purpose AI Law

Explore the Cambridge Commentary
Contents
AI Act provision
Recitals
Select bibliography
Commentary
Chapter I

Search Results

No results found
Introduction
Article 3(47)
Article 51
AI Office
Commentary by Gregor Gindlin

AI Act provision

Article 3(47)

For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions apply:

[…]

(47) ‘ AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. and general-purpose AI models Article 3(63) AI Act: ‘general-purpose AI model’ means an AI model, including where such an AI model is trained with a large amount of data using self-supervision at scale, that displays significant generality and is capable of competently performing a wide range of distinct tasks regardless of the way the model is placed on the market and that can be integrated into a variety of downstream systems or applications, except AI models that are used for research, development or prototyping activities before they are placed on the market. , and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. shall be construed as references to the Commission;

[…]

Recitals

Recital 148

This Regulation should establish a governance framework that both allows to coordinate and support the application of this Regulation at national level, as well as build capabilities at Union level and integrate stakeholders in the field of AI. The effective implementation and enforcement of this Regulation require a governance framework that allows to coordinate and build up central expertise at Union level. The AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. was established by Commission Decision (45) and has as its mission to develop Union expertise and capabilities in the field of AI and to contribute to the implementation of Union law on AI. Member States should facilitate the tasks of the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. with a view to support the development of Union expertise and capabilities at Union level and to strengthen the functioning of the digital single market. Furthermore, a Board composed of representatives of the Member States, a scientific panel to integrate the scientific community and an advisory forum to contribute stakeholder input to the implementation of this Regulation, at Union and national level, should be established. The development of Union expertise and capabilities should also include making use of existing resources and expertise, in particular through synergies with structures built up in the context of the Union level enforcement of other law and synergies with related initiatives at Union level, such as the EuroHPC Joint Undertaking and the AI testing and experimentation facilities under the Digital Europe Programme.

(45) Commission Decision of 24.1.2024 establishing the European Artificial Intelligence Office C(2024) 390.

Select bibliography

  • Feiler L and König B, ‘Article 3 Definitions’ in Ceyhun Necati Pehlivan, Nikolaus Forgó and Peggy Valcke (eds), The EU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act: A Commentary (Wolters Kluwer 2024).
  • Herbers B and Rappenglück D, ‘Die Durchsetzung der KI-Verordnung auf EU-Ebene: Das EU AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’ (2024) Recht Digital 432.
  • Kirschke-Biller J and Füllsack A L, ‘Art. 3 Begriffsbestimmungen’ in Jens Schefzig and Robert Kilian (eds), Beck’scher Online-Kommentar KI-Recht (4th edn, C H Beck 2025).
  • Merkle M, ‘Art. 3 Begriffsbestimmungen’ in David Bomhard, Fritz-Ulli Pieper and Susanne Wende (eds), Kommentar KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz (Fachmedien Recht und Wirtschaft 2025)

Commentary

1. General remarks

1The AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. plays a key role in the AI Act’s implementation and enforcement and in the Union’s AI governance framework at large.1 Article 3(47) defines the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. for the purposes of the AI Act2 with reference to the Commission Decision of January 2024 establishing the European Artificial Intelligence Office (“Establishment Decision”).3 In doing so, the provision clarifies that the AI Act’s references to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ‘shall be construed as references to the Commission’.4 While Article 3(47) also touches upon the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s nature as part of the Commission5 and its principal tasks6, more detailed provisions governing the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s institutional status, remit and operative functioning are found elsewhere, particularly in the Establishment Decision and in Articles 64 and 88(1) AI Act.7 Accordingly, to avoid duplication with the commentaries on these provisions,8 this contribution’s analysis is confined to a discussion of Article 3(47)’s specific definitional elements.

2. Substance

2Article 3(47) defines the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. as ‘the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. and general-purpose AI models Article 3(63) AI Act: ‘general-purpose AI model’ means an AI model, including where such an AI model is trained with a large amount of data using self-supervision at scale, that displays significant generality and is capable of competently performing a wide range of distinct tasks regardless of the way the model is placed on the market and that can be integrated into a variety of downstream systems or applications, except AI models that are used for research, development or prototyping activities before they are placed on the market. , and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024’, while also establishing that ‘references in this Regulation to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. shall be construed as references to the Commission’. Each element of this definition is discussed in turn below.

2.1. Function of the Commission

3By describing the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. as ‘the Commission’s function’, Article 3(47) clarifies that the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. is not an independent Union body but rather forms part of the Commission.9 The designation of the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. as a ‘function’ of the Commission in Article 3(47) instead of a ‘department’ or ‘directorate’ may appear somewhat unusual.10 This terminology plausibly reflects the fact that the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. was not established by the AI Act but by prior Commission decision, which also determines the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s place within the Commission as part of the Directorate-General for Communication Networks, Content and Technology (“DG CNECT”).11 By describing the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. as a ‘function’, Article 3(47) leaves open the organisational status of the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. within the Commission. The AI Act’s lack of concern with the internal organisation of the Commission is further confirmed by Article 88(1). This provision sets out that, with regard to the supervision and enforcement of Chapter V of the AI Act concerning general-purpose AI (“GPAI”) models, the Commission ‘shall entrust the implementation of [its supervision and enforcement] tasks to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’, while expressly noting that this is ‘without prejudice to the powers of organisation of the Commission’.12

2.2. Contribution to AI Act implementation and AI governance

4By referring to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s contribution ‘to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. and general-purpose AI models Article 3(63) AI Act: ‘general-purpose AI model’ means an AI model, including where such an AI model is trained with a large amount of data using self-supervision at scale, that displays significant generality and is capable of competently performing a wide range of distinct tasks regardless of the way the model is placed on the market and that can be integrated into a variety of downstream systems or applications, except AI models that are used for research, development or prototyping activities before they are placed on the market. , and AI governance’, Article 3(47) provides an overview of the tasks of the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. .13 The description of the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s tasks as contributory corresponds to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s dependent status as a Commission directorate14 and reflects the internal allocation of responsibilities within the Commission.15 The reference to ‘implementation’ likely refers – consistently with Article 2(1) and Recital 4 of the Establishment Decision as well as Article 88(1)16 – to the implementation of the AI Act. In this respect, the wording of Article 3(47) is somewhat awkward, as it suggests that the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. contributes to the implementation of AI systems Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. and GPAI models rather than of the AI Act itself.17

5The AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s contribution to the ‘monitoring and supervision of AI systems Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. and general-purpose AI models Article 3(63) AI Act: ‘general-purpose AI model’ means an AI model, including where such an AI model is trained with a large amount of data using self-supervision at scale, that displays significant generality and is capable of competently performing a wide range of distinct tasks regardless of the way the model is placed on the market and that can be integrated into a variety of downstream systems or applications, except AI models that are used for research, development or prototyping activities before they are placed on the market. ’ must be understood against the background of the allocation of responsibilities between the EU and Member States within the AI Act’s governance framework. Contrary to what Article 3(47) may suggest at first glance, the Member States’ market surveillance authorities Article 3(26) AI Act: ‘market surveillance authority’ means the national authority carrying out the activities and taking the measures pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/1020. – not the Commission – generally oversee compliance with the AI system Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. obligations imposed by the AI Act.18 The Commission is only responsible for overseeing compliance with the AI system Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. obligations where an AI system Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. is based on a GPAI model and both the model and the system are developed by the same provider Article 3(3) AI Act: ‘provider’ means a natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body that develops an AI system or a general-purpose AI model or that has an AI system or a general-purpose AI model developed and places it on the market or puts the AI system into service under its own name or trademark, whether for payment or free of charge. .19 By contrast, compliance with the AI Act’s GPAI model provider Article 3(3) AI Act: ‘provider’ means a natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body that develops an AI system or a general-purpose AI model or that has an AI system or a general-purpose AI model developed and places it on the market or puts the AI system into service under its own name or trademark, whether for payment or free of charge. obligations20 is overseen exclusively at Union level by the Commission.21 Finally, the reference to the broad notion of ‘AI governance’ indicates that Article 3(47) does not purport to circumscribe the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s remit in detail22 and signals that the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s remit extends beyond the implementation of the AI Act alone, as set out in Articles 2(2) and 5 to 7 of the Establishment Decision.23

2.3. Reference to the Establishment Decision

6Article 3(47)’s reference to the Establishment Decision clarifies that the AI Act does not itself establish or conclusively govern the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. .24 In some language versions of the AI Act, the parenthetical ‘provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024’ relates to ‘AI governance’ rather than to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ,25 which is not an obvious translation choice. The Establishment Decision establishes the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ,26 setting out its mission and tasks,27 operational functioning,28 and financing;29 in doing so, it does not itself set out the Union’s approach to AI governance but rather refers to other Union acts that do so.30

2.4. Interpretation of the AI Act’s references to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission.

7Article 3(47) sets out that ‘references in [the AI Act] to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. shall be construed as references to the Commission’. Through this formulation, the provision establishes an interpretive rule according to which references to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. must, in principle, be read as references to the Commission itself.31 This interpretive rule again reflects the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s institutional status as a Commission directorate without separate legal personality.32 It guides the interpretation, for example, of Article 75(1). That provision would, read in isolation, appear to confer directly upon the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. , rather than upon the Commission as a whole, monitoring and supervision powers vis-à-vis providers Article 3(3) AI Act: ‘provider’ means a natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body that develops an AI system or a general-purpose AI model or that has an AI system or a general-purpose AI model developed and places it on the market or puts the AI system into service under its own name or trademark, whether for payment or free of charge. of AI systems Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. where the AI system Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. is based on GPAI models and both are developed by the same provider Article 3(3) AI Act: ‘provider’ means a natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body that develops an AI system or a general-purpose AI model or that has an AI system or a general-purpose AI model developed and places it on the market or puts the AI system into service under its own name or trademark, whether for payment or free of charge. .33

8The interpretive rule established by Article 3(47) arguably only applies to the AI Act’s provisions insofar as they govern the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s interactions with entities external to the Commission, and not – or only with limitations – where the role of the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. within the Commission is directly concerned. In particular, Article 88(1) empowers the Commission to supervise and enforce Chapter V of the AI Act on GPAI models and requires that ‘[t]he Commission shall entrust the implementation of these tasks to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’. In contrast, a strict application of Article 3(47) would render this requirement meaningless, contrary to the interpretive principle that where a provision is open to several interpretations, preference must be given to the interpretation which ensures that it retains its effectiveness.34 The same applies to Article 96(2)’s requirement that ‘[a]t the request of […] the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. , or on its own initiative, the Commission shall update guidelines previously adopted when deemed necessary’.35 Similarly, Article 112(5)’s requirement that ‘the Commission shall evaluate the functioning of the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’ by 2 August 2028 arguably concerns the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s functioning in particular, and not the functioning of the Commission as a whole.36 The partial misalignment between the interpretive rule in Article 3(47) and the various uses of the term AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. throughout the AI Act may be explained by Article 3(47) being a late addition during the trilogue negotiations.37

  1. Eric Hilgendorf and Johannes Härtlein, ‘Art. 64 Büro für Künstliche Intelligenz’ in Eric Hilgendorf and Johannes Härtlein (eds), KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz: Kommentar (Nomos 2025) para 1; Björn Herbers and David Rappenglück, ‘Die Durchsetzung der KI-Verordnung auf EU-Ebene: Das EU AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’ (2024) Recht Digital 432, 434 para 4. For an overview of the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s remit, see commentary on Article 64, Section 4. in this work. ↩︎
  2. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) [2024] OJ L 1689/1 (“AI Act”). ↩︎
  3. Commission Decision of 24 January 2024 establishing the European Artificial Intelligence Office [2024] OJ C C/2024/1459 (“Establishment Decision”); see Section 2.3. ↩︎
  4. See Section 2.4. ↩︎
  5. See Section 2.1. ↩︎
  6. See Section 2.2. ↩︎
  7. For the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s institutional status, its remit and its operative functioning, see commentary on Article 64, Sections 3–5 in this work. For the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s role in the enforcement of GPAI model provider Article 3(3) AI Act: ‘provider’ means a natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body that develops an AI system or a general-purpose AI model or that has an AI system or a general-purpose AI model developed and places it on the market or puts the AI system into service under its own name or trademark, whether for payment or free of charge. obligations under the AI Act specifically, see commentary on Article 88, Sections 2.1.3. and 2.1.4. in this work. ↩︎
  8. Commentary on Article 64 in this work; commentary on Article 88, Sections 2.1.3. and 2.1.4. in this work. ↩︎
  9. Marieke Merkle, ‘Art. 3 Begriffsbestimmungen’ in David Bomhard, Fritz-Ulli Pieper and Susanne Wende (eds), Kommentar KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz (Fachmedien Recht und Wirtschaft 2025) para 362. The European Parliament had proposed during the AI Act’s drafting process that the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. be established as an independent Union body, but this proposal did not survive the trilogue negotiations (European Parliament, ‘Amendments adopted on 14 June 2023 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and amending certain Union legislative acts’ P9_TA(2023)0236, amendments 524–530; see Matthias Schmidl and Andreas Rohner, ‘Article 64 AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’ in Ceyhun Necati Pehlivan, Nikolaus Forgó and Peggy Valcke (eds), The EU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act: A Commentary (Wolters Kluwer 2024) 983, sec 3.1; Clemens Bernsteiner and Thomas Rainer Schmitt, ‘Art. 88 Durchsetzung der Pflichten der Anbieter von KI-Modellen mit allgemeinem Verwendungszweck’ in Mario Martini and Christiane Wendehorst (eds), KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz: Kommentar (2nd edn, C H Beck 2026) para 10). ↩︎
  10. See Jonathan Kirschke-Biller and Anna Lena Füllsack, ‘Art. 3 Begriffsbestimmungen’ in Jens Schefzig and Robert Kilian (eds), Beck’scher Online-Kommentar KI-Recht (4th edn, C H Beck 2025) para 550 (criticising the use of ‘Aufgabe’ for ‘function’ in the German language version and contending that the use of ‘function’ in the English language version is more open-textured and therefore more appropriate). ↩︎
  11. See Establishment Decision (n 3) art 1(2). For the role of Directorates-General within the Commission, see Commission Decision (EU) 2024/3080 of 4 December 2024 establishing the Rules of Procedure of the Commission and amending Decision C(2000) 3614 [2024] OJ L 3080 (“Rules of Procedure”), art 45(1); Koen Lenaerts and Piet Van Nuffel, EU Constitutional Law (Oxford University Press 2021) para 12.071. ↩︎
  12. See commentary on Article 88, Sections 2.1.1. and 2.1.4. in this work. ↩︎
  13. For the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s tasks, see also Establishment Decision (n 3) arts 2 and 3; AI Act, arts 64 and 88(1). Further, see commentary on Article 64, Section 4 in this work. ↩︎
  14. A Commission directorate is an administrative division of a Directorate-General (see Rules of Procedure (n 11) art 45(1), third sentence). For the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s status as a Commission directorate, see commentary on Article 64, Section 3.1. in this work. ↩︎
  15. In principle, the power to issue legally binding acts – including delegated acts, implementing acts, designation decisions, requests vis-à-vis GPAI model providers Article 3(3) AI Act: ‘provider’ means a natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body that develops an AI system or a general-purpose AI model or that has an AI system or a general-purpose AI model developed and places it on the market or puts the AI system into service under its own name or trademark, whether for payment or free of charge. and the imposition of fines – remains with the College of Commissioners, while the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. supports the Commission in exercising these powers by preparing draft decisions and, once approved, communicating them externally on the Commission’s behalf (see Susanne Wende, ‘Art. 64 Büro für Künstliche Intelligenz’ in David Bomhard, Fritz-Ulli Pieper and Susanne Wende (eds), Kommentar KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz (Fachmedien Recht und Wirtschaft 2025) para 15 (pointing out that core decision competences concerning the AI Act’s implementation lie with the Commission); Bernsteiner and Schmitt (n 9) para 15 (laying out that the fact that the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. has been afforded tasks is without prejudice to the principle of collegiate responsibility governing the Commission’s actions and that the Commission remains politically and legally responsible for the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s actions)). For a more in-depth analysis of this allocation of responsibilities within the Commission, see commentary on Article 64, Section 4.1.3. in this work. ↩︎
  16. See Establishment Decision (n 3) art 2(1): ‘The Office shall perform the tasks set out in Article 3 for the purposes of implementing and enforcing the forthcoming Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (the “forthcoming Regulation”)’; Establishment Decision (n 3) recital 4: ‘It is necessary to develop expertise and capabilities at Union level with a view to foster such understanding, to contribute to the implementation and enforcement of the forthcoming Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence […].’; AI Act, art 88(1): ‘The Commission shall have exclusive powers to supervise and enforce Chapter V, taking into account the procedural guarantees under Article 94. The Commission shall entrust the implementation of these tasks to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. […].’ ↩︎
  17. This awkward formulation may be explained in part from Article 3(47) being a late addition during the trilogue (see Kirschke-Biller and Füllsack (n 10) para 546). ↩︎
  18. AI Act, art 74(1). ↩︎
  19. AI Act, art 75(1). For an analysis of this provision, see forthcoming commentary on Article 75(1) in this work. ↩︎
  20. See, in particular, AI Act, arts 52(1), 53(1) and 55(1). ↩︎
  21. AI Act, art 88(1). For an analysis of this provision, see commentary on Article 88 in this work. ↩︎
  22. See Kirschke-Biller and Füllsack (n 10) para 553 (contending that Article 64 is the AI Act’s central provision on the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ); Merkle (n 9) para 364 (highlighting the importance of the Establishment Decision (n 3) insofar as the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s remit is concerned). ↩︎
  23. For a discussion of the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s tasks beyond the AI Act’s implementation and enforcement, see commentary on Article 64, Section 4.2. in this work. ↩︎
  24. See also AI Act, recital 148, third sentence: ‘The AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. was established by Commission Decision and has as its mission to develop Union expertise and capabilities in the field of AI and to contribute to the implementation of Union law on AI.’ ↩︎
  25. This applies to the German language version (‘Für die Zwecke dieser Verordnung bezeichnet der Ausdruck […] “Büro für Künstliche Intelligenz“ die Aufgabe der Kommission, zur Umsetzung, Beobachtung und Überwachung von KI-Systemen und KI-Modellen mit allgemeinem Verwendungszweck und zu der im Beschluss der Kommission vom 24. Januar 2024 vorgesehenen KI-Governance beizutragen […].’) and the Spanish language version (‘A los efectos del presente Reglamento, se entenderá por: […] “Oficina de IA”: la función de la Comisión consistente en contribuir a la implantación, el seguimiento y la supervisión de los sistemas de IA y modelos de IA de uso general, y a la gobernanza de la IA prevista por la Decisión de la Comisión de 24 de enero de 2024 […].’) but not to the French language version (‘Aux fins du présent règlement, on entend par: […] “Bureau de l’IA”, la fonction de la Commission consistant à contribuer à la mise en œuvre, au suivi et à la surveillance des systèmes d’IA et de modèles d’IA à usage général et de la gouvernance de l’IA, établi par la décision de la Commission du 24 janvier 2024 […].’) of Article 3. ↩︎
  26. Establishment Decision (n 3) art 1; see commentary on Article 64, para 2 in this work. ↩︎
  27. Establishment Decision (n 3) arts 2(1), 2(2) and 3; see commentary on Article 64, Section 4 in this work. ↩︎
  28. Establishment Decision (n 3) arts 3(3) and 4–7; see commentary on Article 64, Section 5 in this work. ↩︎
  29. Establishment Decision (n 3) art 8; see commentary on Article 64, Section 3, second paragraph in this work. ↩︎
  30. In particular, the Establishment Decision (n 3) refers to the AI Act (Establishment Decision (n 3) arts 2 and 3 and recitals 2, 7 and 8); the Commission’s 2021 Coordinated Plan on Artificial Intelligence (Establishment Decision (n 3), recital 2; see European Commission, ‘Annexes to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Fostering a European approach to Artificial Intelligence’ COM(2021) 205 final); the Digital Europe Programme (Establishment Decision (n 3) recital 2 and art 8(2) and (3); see Regulation (EU) 2021/694 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing the Digital Europe Programme and repealing Decision (EU) 2015/2240 [2021] OJ L 166/1); Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (Establishment Decision (n 3) recital 2; see Regulation (EU) 2021/695 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and dissemination, and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1290/2013 and (EU) No 1291/2013 [2021] OJ L 170/1); and the Digital Decade Policy Programme (Establishment Decision (n 3) recital 3; see Decision (EU) 2022/2481 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 establishing the Digital Decade Policy Programme 2030 [2022] OJ L 323/4). ↩︎
  31. See David Roth-Isigkeit, ‘Art. 64 Büro für Künstliche Intelligenz’ in Mario Martini and Christiane Wendehorst (eds), KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz: Kommentar (2nd edn, C H Beck 2026) para 11 (contending that where the AI Act refers to the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. , the Commission is bound). ↩︎
  32. Lukas Feiler and Beat König, ‘Article 3 Definitions’ in Ceyhun Necati Pehlivan, Nikolaus Forgó and Peggy Valcke (eds), The EU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act: A Commentary (Wolters Kluwer 2024) 76, s 3.47; Schmidl and Rohner (n 9) 983, s 3.1. For the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. ’s institutional status, see commentary on Article 64, Section 3 in this work. ↩︎
  33. See AI Act, art 75(1): ‘Where an AI system Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. is based on a general-purpose AI model Article 3(63) AI Act: ‘general-purpose AI model’ means an AI model, including where such an AI model is trained with a large amount of data using self-supervision at scale, that displays significant generality and is capable of competently performing a wide range of distinct tasks regardless of the way the model is placed on the market and that can be integrated into a variety of downstream systems or applications, except AI models that are used for research, development or prototyping activities before they are placed on the market. , and the model and the system are developed by the same provider Article 3(3) AI Act: ‘provider’ means a natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body that develops an AI system or a general-purpose AI model or that has an AI system or a general-purpose AI model developed and places it on the market or puts the AI system into service under its own name or trademark, whether for payment or free of charge. , the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. shall have powers to monitor and supervise compliance of that AI system Article 3(1) AI Act: ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. with obligations under this Regulation. To carry out its monitoring and supervision tasks, the AI Office Article 3(47) AI Act: ‘AI Office’ means the Commission’s function of contributing to the implementation, monitoring and supervision of AI systems and general-purpose AI models, and AI governance, provided for in Commission Decision of 24 January 2024; references in this Regulation to the AI Office shall be construed as references to the Commission. shall have all the powers of a market surveillance authority Article 3(26) AI Act: ‘market surveillance authority’ means the national authority carrying out the activities and taking the measures pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/1020. provided for in this Section and Regulation (EU) 2019/1020.’; see also forthcoming commentary on Article 75(1) in this work. ↩︎
  34. See, for example, Cases C-154/21 RW v Österreichische Post AG [2023] ECLI:EU:C:2023:3 para 29 and C-31/17 Cristal Union, the legal successor to Sucrerie de Toury SA v Ministre de l’Économie et des Finances [2018] ECLI:EU:C:2018:168 para 41; further, see Koen Lenaerts and José A. Gutiérrez-Fons, ‘To Say What the Law of the EU Is: Methods of Interpretation and the European Court of Justice’ (2014) 20 Columbia Journal of European Law 3, 17–21. ↩︎
  35. See Christina Brandt-Steinke, ‘Art. 96 Leitlinien der Kommission zur Durchführung dieser Verordnung’ in Jens Schefzig and Robert Kilian (eds), Beck’scher Online-Kommentar KI-Recht (4th edn, C H Beck 2025) paras 52–53; Sarah Hartmann, ‘Art. 96 Leitlinien der Kommission zur Durchführung dieser Verordnung’ in Mario Martini and Christiane Wendehorst (eds), KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz: Kommentar (2nd edn, C H Beck 2026) para 6. ↩︎
  36. See Christiane Wendehorst, ‘Art. 112 Bewertung und Überprüfung’ in Mario Martini and Christiane Wendehorst (eds), KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz: Kommentar (2nd edn, C H Beck 2026) para 9; Benedikt Rohrßen, ‘Art. 112 Bewertung und Überprüfung’ in David Bomhard, Fritz-Ulli Pieper and Susanne Wende (eds), Kommentar KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz (Fachmedien Recht und Wirtschaft 2025) paras 29–30. ↩︎
  37. See Kirschke-Biller and Füllsack (n 10) para 546. ↩︎

© Institute for Law & AI, 2026

Contents
AI Act provision
Recitals
Select bibliography
Commentary
Submitted:  
Published:  
Updated:  
Cite
Copied to clipboard
Cite
Gregor Gindlin, 'Article 3(47): AI Office' (Cambridge Commentary on EU General-Purpose AI Law, 29 Apr 2026) <https://cambridge-commentary.ai/article-3-47/>
Copied to clipboard
Download

Search Results

No results found
Submitted:  
Published:  
Updated:  
Cite
Copied to clipboard
Cite
Gregor Gindlin, 'Article 3(47): AI Office' (Cambridge Commentary on EU General-Purpose AI Law, 29 Apr 2026) <https://cambridge-commentary.ai/article-3-47/>
Copied to clipboard
Download Chapter
Reading Mode
1
Eric Hilgendorf and Johannes Härtlein, ‘Art. 64 Büro für Künstliche Intelligenz’ in Eric Hilgendorf and Johannes Härtlein (eds), KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz: Kommentar (Nomos 2025) para 1; Björn Herbers and David Rappenglück, ‘Die Durchsetzung der KI-Verordnung auf EU-Ebene: Das EU AI Office’ (2024) Recht Digital 432, 434 para 4. For an overview of the AI Office’s remit, see commentary on Article 64, Section 4. in this work.
2
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) [2024] OJ L 1689/1 (“AI Act”).
3
Commission Decision of 24 January 2024 establishing the European Artificial Intelligence Office [2024] OJ C C/2024/1459 (“Establishment Decision”); see Section 2.3.
4
See Section 2.4.
5
See Section 2.1.
6
See Section 2.2.
7
For the AI Office’s institutional status, its remit and its operative functioning, see commentary on Article 64, Sections 3–5 in this work. For the AI Office’s role in the enforcement of GPAI model provider obligations under the AI Act specifically, see commentary on Article 88, Sections 2.1.3. and 2.1.4. in this work.
8
Commentary on Article 64 in this work; commentary on Article 88, Sections 2.1.3. and 2.1.4. in this work.
9
Marieke Merkle, ‘Art. 3 Begriffsbestimmungen’ in David Bomhard, Fritz-Ulli Pieper and Susanne Wende (eds), Kommentar KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz (Fachmedien Recht und Wirtschaft 2025) para 362. The European Parliament had proposed during the AI Act’s drafting process that the AI Office be established as an independent Union body, but this proposal did not survive the trilogue negotiations (European Parliament, ‘Amendments adopted on 14 June 2023 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and amending certain Union legislative acts’ P9_TA(2023)0236, amendments 524–530; see Matthias Schmidl and Andreas Rohner, ‘Article 64 AI Office’ in Ceyhun Necati Pehlivan, Nikolaus Forgó and Peggy Valcke (eds), The EU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act: A Commentary (Wolters Kluwer 2024) 983, sec 3.1; Clemens Bernsteiner and Thomas Rainer Schmitt, ‘Art. 88 Durchsetzung der Pflichten der Anbieter von KI-Modellen mit allgemeinem Verwendungszweck’ in Mario Martini and Christiane Wendehorst (eds), KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz: Kommentar (2nd edn, C H Beck 2026) para 10).
10
See Jonathan Kirschke-Biller and Anna Lena Füllsack, ‘Art. 3 Begriffsbestimmungen’ in Jens Schefzig and Robert Kilian (eds), Beck’scher Online-Kommentar KI-Recht (4th edn, C H Beck 2025) para 550 (criticising the use of ‘Aufgabe’ for ‘function’ in the German language version and contending that the use of ‘function’ in the English language version is more open-textured and therefore more appropriate).
11
See Establishment Decision (n 3) art 1(2). For the role of Directorates-General within the Commission, see Commission Decision (EU) 2024/3080 of 4 December 2024 establishing the Rules of Procedure of the Commission and amending Decision C(2000) 3614 [2024] OJ L 3080 (“Rules of Procedure”), art 45(1); Koen Lenaerts and Piet Van Nuffel, EU Constitutional Law (Oxford University Press 2021) para 12.071.
12
See commentary on Article 88, Sections 2.1.1. and 2.1.4. in this work.
13
For the AI Office’s tasks, see also Establishment Decision (n 3) arts 2 and 3; AI Act, arts 64 and 88(1). Further, see commentary on Article 64, Section 4 in this work.
14
A Commission directorate is an administrative division of a Directorate-General (see Rules of Procedure (n 11) art 45(1), third sentence). For the AI Office’s status as a Commission directorate, see commentary on Article 64, Section 3.1. in this work.
15
In principle, the power to issue legally binding acts – including delegated acts, implementing acts, designation decisions, requests vis-à-vis GPAI model providers and the imposition of fines – remains with the College of Commissioners, while the AI Office supports the Commission in exercising these powers by preparing draft decisions and, once approved, communicating them externally on the Commission’s behalf (see Susanne Wende, ‘Art. 64 Büro für Künstliche Intelligenz’ in David Bomhard, Fritz-Ulli Pieper and Susanne Wende (eds), Kommentar KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz (Fachmedien Recht und Wirtschaft 2025) para 15 (pointing out that core decision competences concerning the AI Act’s implementation lie with the Commission); Bernsteiner and Schmitt (n 9) para 15 (laying out that the fact that the AI Office has been afforded tasks is without prejudice to the principle of collegiate responsibility governing the Commission’s actions and that the Commission remains politically and legally responsible for the AI Office’s actions)). For a more in-depth analysis of this allocation of responsibilities within the Commission, see commentary on Article 64, Section 4.1.3. in this work.
16
See Establishment Decision (n 3) art 2(1): ‘The Office shall perform the tasks set out in Article 3 for the purposes of implementing and enforcing the forthcoming Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (the “forthcoming Regulation”)’; Establishment Decision (n 3) recital 4: ‘It is necessary to develop expertise and capabilities at Union level with a view to foster such understanding, to contribute to the implementation and enforcement of the forthcoming Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence [...].’; AI Act, art 88(1): ‘The Commission shall have exclusive powers to supervise and enforce Chapter V, taking into account the procedural guarantees under Article 94. The Commission shall entrust the implementation of these tasks to the AI Office [...].’
17
This awkward formulation may be explained in part from Article 3(47) being a late addition during the trilogue (see Kirschke-Biller and Füllsack (n 10) para 546).
18
AI Act, art 74(1).
19
AI Act, art 75(1). For an analysis of this provision, see forthcoming commentary on Article 75(1) in this work.
20
See, in particular, AI Act, arts 52(1), 53(1) and 55(1).
21
AI Act, art 88(1). For an analysis of this provision, see commentary on Article 88 in this work.
22
See Kirschke-Biller and Füllsack (n 10) para 553 (contending that Article 64 is the AI Act’s central provision on the AI Office); Merkle (n 9) para 364 (highlighting the importance of the Establishment Decision (n 3) insofar as the AI Office’s remit is concerned).
23
For a discussion of the AI Office’s tasks beyond the AI Act’s implementation and enforcement, see commentary on Article 64, Section 4.2. in this work.
24
See also AI Act, recital 148, third sentence: ‘The AI Office was established by Commission Decision and has as its mission to develop Union expertise and capabilities in the field of AI and to contribute to the implementation of Union law on AI.’
25
This applies to the German language version (‘Für die Zwecke dieser Verordnung bezeichnet der Ausdruck [...] “Büro für Künstliche Intelligenz“ die Aufgabe der Kommission, zur Umsetzung, Beobachtung und Überwachung von KI-Systemen und KI-Modellen mit allgemeinem Verwendungszweck und zu der im Beschluss der Kommission vom 24. Januar 2024 vorgesehenen KI-Governance beizutragen [...].’) and the Spanish language version (‘A los efectos del presente Reglamento, se entenderá por: [...] “Oficina de IA”: la función de la Comisión consistente en contribuir a la implantación, el seguimiento y la supervisión de los sistemas de IA y modelos de IA de uso general, y a la gobernanza de la IA prevista por la Decisión de la Comisión de 24 de enero de 2024 [...].’) but not to the French language version (‘Aux fins du présent règlement, on entend par: [...] “Bureau de l’IA”, la fonction de la Commission consistant à contribuer à la mise en œuvre, au suivi et à la surveillance des systèmes d’IA et de modèles d’IA à usage général et de la gouvernance de l’IA, établi par la décision de la Commission du 24 janvier 2024 [...].’) of Article 3.
26
Establishment Decision (n 3) art 1; see commentary on Article 64, para 2 in this work.
27
Establishment Decision (n 3) arts 2(1), 2(2) and 3; see commentary on Article 64, Section 4 in this work.
28
Establishment Decision (n 3) arts 3(3) and 4–7; see commentary on Article 64, Section 5 in this work.
29
Establishment Decision (n 3) art 8; see commentary on Article 64, Section 3, second paragraph in this work.
30
In particular, the Establishment Decision (n 3) refers to the AI Act (Establishment Decision (n 3) arts 2 and 3 and recitals 2, 7 and 8); the Commission’s 2021 Coordinated Plan on Artificial Intelligence (Establishment Decision (n 3), recital 2; see European Commission, ‘Annexes to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Fostering a European approach to Artificial Intelligence’ COM(2021) 205 final); the Digital Europe Programme (Establishment Decision (n 3) recital 2 and art 8(2) and (3); see Regulation (EU) 2021/694 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing the Digital Europe Programme and repealing Decision (EU) 2015/2240 [2021] OJ L 166/1); Horizon Europe - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (Establishment Decision (n 3) recital 2; see Regulation (EU) 2021/695 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and dissemination, and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1290/2013 and (EU) No 1291/2013 [2021] OJ L 170/1); and the Digital Decade Policy Programme (Establishment Decision (n 3) recital 3; see Decision (EU) 2022/2481 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 establishing the Digital Decade Policy Programme 2030 [2022] OJ L 323/4).
31
See David Roth-Isigkeit, ‘Art. 64 Büro für Künstliche Intelligenz’ in Mario Martini and Christiane Wendehorst (eds), KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz: Kommentar (2nd edn, C H Beck 2026) para 11 (contending that where the AI Act refers to the AI Office, the Commission is bound).
32
Lukas Feiler and Beat König, ‘Article 3 Definitions’ in Ceyhun Necati Pehlivan, Nikolaus Forgó and Peggy Valcke (eds), The EU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act: A Commentary (Wolters Kluwer 2024) 76, s 3.47; Schmidl and Rohner (n 9) 983, s 3.1. For the AI Office’s institutional status, see commentary on Article 64, Section 3 in this work.
33
See AI Act, art 75(1): ‘Where an AI system is based on a general-purpose AI model, and the model and the system are developed by the same provider, the AI Office shall have powers to monitor and supervise compliance of that AI system with obligations under this Regulation. To carry out its monitoring and supervision tasks, the AI Office shall have all the powers of a market surveillance authority provided for in this Section and Regulation (EU) 2019/1020.’; see also forthcoming commentary on Article 75(1) in this work.
34
See, for example, Cases C-154/21 RW v Österreichische Post AG [2023] ECLI:EU:C:2023:3 para 29 and C-31/17 Cristal Union, the legal successor to Sucrerie de Toury SA v Ministre de l'Économie et des Finances [2018] ECLI:EU:C:2018:168 para 41; further, see Koen Lenaerts and José A. Gutiérrez-Fons, ‘To Say What the Law of the EU Is: Methods of Interpretation and the European Court of Justice’ (2014) 20 Columbia Journal of European Law 3, 17–21.
35
See Christina Brandt-Steinke, ‘Art. 96 Leitlinien der Kommission zur Durchführung dieser Verordnung’ in Jens Schefzig and Robert Kilian (eds), Beck’scher Online-Kommentar KI-Recht (4th edn, C H Beck 2025) paras 52–53; Sarah Hartmann, ‘Art. 96 Leitlinien der Kommission zur Durchführung dieser Verordnung’ in Mario Martini and Christiane Wendehorst (eds), KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz: Kommentar (2nd edn, C H Beck 2026) para 6.
36
See Christiane Wendehorst, ‘Art. 112 Bewertung und Überprüfung’ in Mario Martini and Christiane Wendehorst (eds), KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz: Kommentar (2nd edn, C H Beck 2026) para 9; Benedikt Rohrßen, ‘Art. 112 Bewertung und Überprüfung’ in David Bomhard, Fritz-Ulli Pieper and Susanne Wende (eds), Kommentar KI-VO: Verordnung über Künstliche Intelligenz (Fachmedien Recht und Wirtschaft 2025) paras 29–30.
37
See Kirschke-Biller and Füllsack (n 10) para 546.