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

Niamh Smyth (FF), Cavan-Monaghan

I oppose amendments Nos. 78 and 79. Section 102 establishes an important safeguard within the adjudication framework. While the adjudicator is responsible for independently determining the facts of the case and making findings under sections 99 and 100, the applicable market surveillance authority remains the statutory authority responsible for enforcement of the AI Act within the system. Accordingly, section 102(1)(b) permits the applicable market surveillance authority, in limited circumstances, to decline to adopt a finding that an infringement has occurred where it is not satisfied that a breach of the AI Act has been established.
I consider that the provision reflects the fact that the adjudicator's role is to make findings and recommendations, while the final regulatory decision remains with the statutory authority charged with enforcement responsibility. Similar decision-making structures exist in a number of Irish regulatory bodies where investigative, adjudicative and enforcement functions are separated. The provision, therefore, forms part of the overall constitutional and administrative architecture of Part 6. The amendment would remove that safeguard and would effectively make the adoption of an adjudicator's findings mandatory in every case where an infringement is found, irrespective of the views of the responsible market surveillance authority. The Government does not consider that such an approach would be appropriate.
As regards amendment No. 79, which proposes the deletion of section 102(4), I do not accept it. Section 102(4) provides the procedural consequences where the applicable market surveillance authority declines to adopt a finding under section 102(1)(b), or where the adjudicator finds that no infringement has occurred and that finding is adopted under section 102(2). In such circumstances, the authority is required to notify the adjudication subject and take no further action against the person in relation to the matter. This provision is an important element of legal certainty and fair procedures. It ensures that, where enforcement action is not being pursued, the person concerned receives formal notification of that fact and the matter is brought to a conclusion. If subsection (4) were removed, the Bill would no longer specify what happens where an adjudicator finds no infringement or where the authority declines to adopt a positive finding. That would create uncertainty for both the authority and the person concerned and would leave a significant procedural gap within the adjudication process.

---

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