Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Bill 2026: Committee Stage (Resumed) and Remaining Stages
Seanad Éireann — 2026-07-15
============================================================

Alice-Mary Higgins (IND), National University of Ireland

I move amendment No. 47:
In page 32, between lines 31 and 32, to insert the following:
“Co-operation forum
45. (1) The Office shall establish a co-operation forum which shall include representatives of Oifig IS na hÉireann, Market Surveillance Authorities and Fundamental Human Rights Bodies, to meet a minimum of once per quarter and to discuss issues such as but not limited to—
(a) assignment of complex adjudications,
(b) co-operation strategies,
(c) means of information exchange, and
(d) other issues relevant to the enforcement of this Act, at the discretion of Oifig IS na hÉireann as the case may be experts may be summoned to give evidence regarding a matter before the Co-operation Forum.
(2) Where two or more Market Surveillance Authorities receive a complaint relating to the same potential breach of this Act they shall determine between themselves the lead Market Surveillance Authority who shall then appoint an authorised officer and shall be responsible for liaising with the other relevant Market Surveillance Authorities regarding the case.
(3) Should under subsection (2) the relevant Market Surveillance Authorities fail to agree the lead Market Surveillance Authority within 14 days the matter shall be referred to Oifig IS na hÉireann which shall appoint a lead Market Surveillance Authority.”.
This is an amendment put forward by Senator Stephenson. It is looking to establish a co-operation forum that would include representatives of the market surveillance authorities, the fundamental human rights bodies, and oifig IS na hÉireann, to meet a minimum of once per quarter to discuss issues including, but not limited to, the assignment of complex adjudications, co-operation strategies, means of information exchange and other issues relevant to the enforcement of this Act and, implicitly so, also to the enforcement of the regulation. It is at the discretion of oifig IS na hÉireann as the case may be in terms of experts who may be summoned to give evidence regarding a matter before the co-operation forum. Where two or more market surveillance authorities receive a complaint relating to the same potential breach of the Act, they will determine between themselves who the lead market surveillance authority will be. They will then appoint an authorised officer who will be responsible for liaising with the other relevant market surveillance authorities regarding the case. Under subsection (2), should the relevant market surveillance authorities fail to agree the lead market surveillance authority within 14 days, the matter will be referred to oifig IS na hÉireann, which will appoint a lead market surveillance authority.
The fundamental rights bodies have been inserted again into this. Crucially, the amendment seeks to ensure that adjudication of decisions, processing and enforcement are happening and that we do not end up with people being sent from pillar to post or, in the worst scenario, something akin to forum shopping from those who may be the subject of investigation, surveillance or adjudication, where they would be able to choose to go with this market surveillance authority rather than that one. It is crucial that there is a clear pathway that ensures that action is being taken, and that we do not have a number of different potential authorities wondering who will take the lead and how it will be led forward, ending up in a limbo. It is also important that those who are being adjudicated on do not get to choose who they want to do the adjudication because of a lack of a clear process. There must be a proper process whereby the regulatory system itself will determine who is going to lead on the adjudication, having the oifig as a fail-safe if that decision becomes difficult, along with the useful insight of fundamental human rights bodies such as IHREC and others, who may be there to have a perspective.
This is a very good-faith attempt by Senator Stephenson to ensure that we do not end up with breaches falling between stools and not being properly acted upon or ambiguity as to how they are being brought forward. Is the Minister of State interested in the co-operation forum the Senator has proposed in good faith, or an alternative mechanism to ensure that we do not end up with gaps or a situation where those making the breach can almost choose where they are going to be adjudicated from?

---

Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted.

Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-07-15/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-27T06:52:16+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-07-15