Your Privacy
English

Bodies with power

AI Act Scientific Panel of Independent Experts

Type
Government body
Place
European Union
Last checked
2026-09-22
Next check due
2027-03-21

Ways to reach them

  • Public contact for the Scientific Panel · Email address
    none published
    Verification expired · 2026-09-22

    This route is retained as reference only. Its verification is missing, more than 180 days old, or the contact window is not currently open; do not rely on it until it is re-checked.

    n/a

    VERIFIED ABSENCE — the Commission's Scientific Panel page names all 60 members but publishes no contact address, no submission mechanism and no route for outsiders to trigger consideration of a risk.

  • Indirect route via the AI Office (panel secretariat) · Email address
    Verification expired · 2026-09-22

    This route is retained as reference only. Its verification is missing, more than 180 days old, or the contact window is not currently open; do not rely on it until it is re-checked.

    The AI Office supports the panel; this is the only published address in the chain.

    VERIFIED on the AI Office page, not on the panel page. There is no guarantee correspondence reaches panel members.

  • Homepage · Homepage
    Unchecked

What it does

CONSTITUTED. Established under Article 68 of the AI Act and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/454; 60 independent experts were recruited and named in 2026 (announced alongside the Advisory Forum around June 2026), serving renewable 24-month terms in a personal capacity, having signed confidentiality and commitment declarations. Its duties: alerting the AI Office to systemic risks, advising on GPAI classification and evaluation methodologies, and supporting market surveillance. Its sharpest instrument is the Article 90 QUALIFIED ALERT: where the panel suspects a GPAI model poses a concrete identifiable risk at Union level or meets the Article 51 systemic-risk conditions, it may issue a reasoned alert naming the provider, on receipt of which the AI Office may exercise its Article 91-94 powers (demand documentation, conduct evaluations, require remedial measures) and must inform the AI Board of measures taken.

Its powers

advise

Honest assessment

THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT GAP IN THE ENTIRE DIRECTORY. The Scientific Panel is the only body anywhere with a statutory mechanism to force regulatory scrutiny of a specific frontier model on systemic-risk grounds — the Article 90 qualified alert — and there is NO published way for an outside researcher, a whistleblower or a member of the public to bring evidence to it. No email, no form, no submission process. The realistic route is therefore personal: the 60 members are named publicly on the Commission's page, they are working academics with institutional addresses, and approaching an individual panel member with technical evidence is the only practical path. Membership renews on 24-month terms, and the Commission runs public calls for experts — applying is the other way in.

Notes

Separate from the Advisory Forum. Do not confuse the two: the panel is 60 independent scientists with an alert power; the forum is 174 stakeholders with an opinion-giving role.

Sources

Something wrong here?