Amendment 1157· GDPR Article 22(1b)
+Addition
Text of the amendment
As tabled
Amending instruction
1b. In Article 22, the following paragraph is inserted:
Paragraph it would add
Where a decision referred to in paragraph 1 is based on the output of a high-risk AI system within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, the measures referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1, and the safeguards accompanying a decision taken pursuant to points (a) and (c) thereof, shall be without prejudice to the human oversight requirements laid down in Article 14 of that Regulation. In particular, natural persons to whom human oversight is assigned shall be enabled to properly understand the capacities and limitations of the system, to correctly interpret its output, to remain aware of the risk of over-reliance on that output, and to decide not to use the system or to disregard, override or reverse its output. Automated processing shall not deprive the data subject of the right to obtain human intervention, to express his or her point of view and to contest the decision.'
GDPR Article 22 with this amendment
Amendment 1157 applied to the Commission proposal, no other amendment
Unchanged: (1)
A decision which produces legal effects for a data subject or similarly significantly affects him or her may be based solely on automated processing, including profiling, only where that decision:
is necessary for entering into, or performance of, a contract between the data subject and a data controller regardless of whether the decision could be taken otherwise than by solely automated means;
is authorised by Union or Member State law to which the controller is subject and which also lays down suitable measures to safeguard the data subject’s rights and freedoms and legitimate interests; or
is based on the data subject’s explicit consent.
Where a decision referred to in paragraph 1 is based on the output of a high-risk AI system within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, the measures referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1, and the safeguards accompanying a decision taken pursuant to points (a) and (c) thereof, shall be without prejudice to the human oversight requirements laid down in Article 14 of that Regulation. In particular, natural persons to whom human oversight is assigned shall be enabled to properly understand the capacities and limitations of the system, to correctly interpret its output, to remain aware of the risk of over-reliance on that output, and to decide not to use the system or to disregard, override or reverse its output. Automated processing shall not deprive the data subject of the right to obtain human intervention, to express his or her point of view and to contest the decision.'
+NewUnchanged: (3) and (4)
In the cases referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 2, the data controller shall implement suitable measures to safeguard the data subject’s rights and freedoms and legitimate interests, at least the right to obtain human intervention on the part of the controller, to express his or her point of view and to contest the decision.
Decisions referred to in paragraph 2 shall not be based on special categories of personal data referred to in Article 9(1), unless point (a) or (g) of Article 9(2) applies and suitable measures to safeguard the data subject’s rights and freedoms and legitimate interests are in place.
Justification
Decisions based solely on automated processing that produce legal effects or similarly significantly affect a data subject raise particular risks where they rely on the output of a high-risk AI system. This amendment clarifies that, in such cases, the safeguards under Article 22 are without prejudice to the human oversight requirements laid down in Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689: the natural persons to whom oversight is assigned must be able to understand the system’s capacities and limitations, to interpret its output correctly, to remain aware of the risk of over-reliance, and to disregard, override or reverse that output. It further recalls that automated processing may not deprive the data subject of the right to obtain human intervention, to express his or her point of view and to contest the decision. This ensures the coherence of the Union acquis by articulating the structural obligation of human oversight under the Artificial Intelligence Act with the individual right to human intervention under the General Data Protection Regulation.
Target
Wording of the targeted provisionlaw in force, Commission proposal, latest Council text
No Council text amends Article 22(1b).
Cite this amendment
Amendment 1157 (Julie Rechagneux and others), European Parliament, Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, amendments 1053–1260 to the draft report on COM(2025) 837 (CJ72-AM-791073, PE791.073v01-00, 27 July 2026), pp. 83–84
Link, short form and official text
Amendment 1157 (Julie Rechagneux and others), European Parliament, Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, amendments 1053–1260 to the draft report on COM(2025) 837 (CJ72-AM-791073, PE791.073v01-00, 27 July 2026), pp. 83–84
ITRE–LIBE Amendment 1157 (CJ72-AM-791073), p. 83