Map the complete governance architecture established by the AI Act
Explain the role, powers, and functions of each governance body
Understand the interaction between EU-level and national authorities
Identify appropriate engagement points for different compliance matters
Navigate the governance framework for GPAI versus high-risk AI issues
Governance Architecture Overview
The AI Act establishes a multi-layered governance framework combining EU-level coordination with national enforcement. This architecture reflects the shared competence model of EU regulation while ensuring consistent application across the single market.
Governance Body Overview
Body
Legal Basis
Level
Primary Function
Composition
European AI Office
Article 64
EU
GPAI enforcement, coordination
Commission staff + external experts
European AI Board
Article 65
EU
Coordination, guidance
National authority representatives
Scientific Panel
Article 68
EU
Technical expertise
Independent scientific experts
Advisory Forum
Article 67
EU
Stakeholder input
Industry, civil society, academia
National Competent Authorities
Article 70
National
High-risk AI enforcement
Member State designation
Market Surveillance Authorities
Article 74
National
Market monitoring
Member State designation
Notifying Authorities
Article 28
National
Conformity body oversight
Member State designation
The European AI Office (Article 64)
Establishment and Structure
The AI Office is established within the European Commission as the central EU-level authority for AI Act implementation. It became operational in early 2024.
Aspect
Details
Location
DG CONNECT, European Commission, Brussels
Reporting
Reports to Commissioner for Internal Market
Staff
~140 staff (planned), mix of policy, legal, and technical
Support Commission on systemic risk classification
Coordination
Article 64
Coordinate with national authorities, AI Board
International Cooperation
Article 64
Engage with third countries, international organisations
GPAI-Specific Powers
Power
Scope
Exercise
Information Requests
Request information from GPAI providers
Article 91
Evaluations
Request model evaluations
Article 92
Access to Documentation
Access technical documentation, training data
Article 91
Enforcement Measures
Issue binding decisions, corrective measures
Article 93
Fines Recommendation
Recommend fines to Commission
Article 101
Expert Insight
The AI Office is your primary regulatory contact for GPAI compliance. Unlike high-risk AI (national authorities), GPAI matters are handled centrally. Establish a relationship with the AI Office early if you're a GPAI provider.
The European AI Board (Article 65)
Composition and Structure
The AI Board brings together national authority representatives to ensure consistent AI Act implementation across Member States.
Element
Details
Chair
One of the Member State representatives, elected by the Board per Article 65(8)
Members
One senior representative per Member State
Observers
European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS); AI Office attends without voting rights
Secretariat
AI Office provides secretariat support
Meetings
Regular meetings, at least quarterly
Voting
Voting rules determined by the Board's own rules of procedure, adopted by a two-thirds majority per Article 65(5)
Key Functions
Function
Description
Output
Coordination
Coordinate national authority approaches
Consistent enforcement
Guidance
Advise Commission on implementation
Opinions, recommendations
Best Practices
Share enforcement experiences
Best practice documents
Alerts
Alert system for non-compliant AI
Cross-border coordination
Opinions
Opinions on draft delegated acts
Advisory input
Implementation Reports
Annual implementation reports
Transparency
Standing Sub-Groups
The AI Board establishes standing and temporary sub-groups for specific topics (Article 65(6)):
Sub-Group
Focus
High-Risk AI
High-risk classification, conformity assessment
Market Surveillance
Surveillance coordination, joint actions
Fundamental Rights
Rights impact, vulnerable groups
Sandboxes
Regulatory sandbox coordination
SME Support
SME implementation support
The Scientific Panel (Article 68)
Purpose and Composition
The Scientific Panel provides independent technical expertise to the AI Office and Commission, particularly on GPAI model classification and evaluation.
Aspect
Details
Size
Independent experts (number determined by Commission)
The Scientific Panel may issue "qualified alerts" when:
Trigger
Process
Effect
Reasoned request to AI Office
Scientific Panel assesses risks
AI Office must respond
Own-initiative assessment
Panel identifies emerging risks
Commission notified
Systemic risk evidence
Technical assessment conducted
May trigger classification
Compliance Note
Scientific Panel alerts can trigger AI Office investigations and potentially systemic risk classification. Monitor panel publications and address any concerns about your models proactively.
The Advisory Forum (Article 67)
Purpose
The Advisory Forum provides a structured mechanism for stakeholder input into AI Act implementation.
Composition
Stakeholder Group
Representatives
Industry
Large enterprises, tech companies
SMEs
Small and medium enterprise representatives
Start-ups
Innovation and start-up ecosystem
Civil Society
NGOs, consumer groups, rights organisations
Academia
Universities, research institutions
Users
Deployers, end-user representatives
Trade Unions
Worker representatives
National Authorities
Observer status where appropriate
Additional Structural Details
Aspect
Details
Minimum meeting frequency
At least twice a year (Article 67(7))
Permanent members
FRA, ENISA, CEN, CENELEC, and ETSI (Article 67(5))
Co-chairs
Two co-chairs elected from among the members (Article 67(6))
Functions
Function
Activities
Consultation
Provide input on guidelines, standards
Expertise
Share practical implementation experience
Recommendations
Issue recommendations to AI Board
Feedback
Provide feedback on regulatory proposals
Reporting
Contribute to implementation reports
National Level Governance
National Competent Authorities (Article 70)
Each Member State must designate one or more national competent authorities: