Skip to content
AI Act Recital 58 EN
LLM context A cited markdown file you can paste into your AI assistant (ChatGPT, Claude, a RAG or project knowledge base) to ground it in this law. Contains: the full text of every article, recital and provision of this law. Everything links back to its source on overview.legal — legal information, not advice.

Recital 58 — AI essential public services access

In force — consolidated2026-07-27 · CELEX 02024R1689-20260727 · ELI ↗
Version history 2
  • 2026-07-27in force CELEX 02024R1689-20260727
  • 2024-07-12 CELEX 02024R1689-20240712

Another area in which the use of AI systems deserves special consideration is the access to and enjoyment of certain essential private and public services and benefits necessary for people to fully participate in society or to improve one’s standard of living. In particular, natural persons applying for or receiving essential public assistance benefits and services from public authorities namely healthcare services, social security benefits, social services providing protection in cases such as maternity, illness, industrial accidents, dependency or old age and loss of employment and social and housing assistance, are typically dependent on those benefits and services and in a vulnerable position in relation to the responsible authorities. If AI systems are used for determining whether such benefits and services should be granted, denied, reduced, revoked or reclaimed by authorities, including whether beneficiaries are legitimately entitled to such benefits or services, those systems may have a significant impact on persons’ livelihood and may infringe their fundamental rights, such as the right to social protection, non-discrimination, human dignity or an effective remedy and should therefore be classified as high-risk. Nonetheless, this Regulation should not hamper the development and use of innovative approaches in the public administration, which would stand to benefit from a wider use of compliant and safe AI systems, provided that those systems do not entail a high risk to legal and natural persons. In addition, AI systems used to evaluate the credit score or creditworthiness of natural persons should be classified as high-risk AI systems, since they determine those persons’ access to financial resources or essential services such as housing, electricity, and telecommunication services. AI systems used for those purposes may lead to discrimination between persons or groups and may perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination, such as that based on racial or ethnic origins, gender, disabilities, age or sexual orientation, or may create new forms of discriminatory impacts. However, AI systems provided for by Union law for the purpose of detecting fraud in the offering of financial services and for prudential purposes to calculate credit institutions’ and insurance undertakings’ capital requirements should not be considered to be high-risk under this Regulation. Moreover, AI systems intended to be used for risk assessment and pricing in relation to natural persons for health and life insurance can also have a significant impact on persons’ livelihood and if not duly designed, developed and used, can infringe their fundamental rights and can lead to serious consequences for people’s life and health, including financial exclusion and discrimination. Finally, AI systems used to evaluate and classify emergency calls by natural persons or to dispatch or establish priority in the dispatching of emergency first response services, including by police, firefighters and medical aid, as well as of emergency healthcare patient triage systems, should also be classified as high-risk since they make decisions in very critical situations for the life and health of persons and their property.

Related across sources

Opinion 1/2026 EDPB-EDPS Joint opinion 1/2026 on the Proposal for a Regulation as regards the simplification of the implementation of harmonised rules on artificial intelligence EDPB, EDPB-EDPS Joint opinion 1/2026 on the Proposal for a Regulation as regards the simplification of the implementation of harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Digital… Opinion Jan 21, 2026 Artificial Intelligence Entry Into Force Mutual Assistance Between Member States for AI Oversight
2022 EDPB Annual Report 2021 Enhancing the depth and breadth of data protection 2 EDPB Annual Report 2021 2 ENHANCING THE DEPTH AND BREADTH OF DATA PROTECTION An Executive Summary of this report, which… May 12, 2022 Privacy Shield Processing Agreement International Transfer
2021 Statement on the Digital Services Package and Data Strategy 1 Adopted Statement on the D igital Services Package and Data Strategy Adopted on 18 November 2021 The European Data Protection Board has adopted the following statement: Since… EDPB Nov 18, 2021 Accountability Transparency Types of Special Categories of Personal Data
22/01253 Dutch Supreme Court: patient not entitled to access peer-review assessment of medical file A patient (the data subject) was treated in a hospital. Because she believed that an error had been made, she held the hospital liable. The hospital involved its liability… Hoge Raad Aug 26, 2022 Right of Access Healthcare Health Data
1 As 183/2023-62 Health insurer must disclose aggregated patient treatment data under Free Access to OAKS Consulting s.r.o. (the company) provided consulting services concerning market access conditions for medicinal products and medical devices. Pursuant to the Czech Act on Free… Supreme Administrative Court Aug 4, 2026 Pseudonymization Anonymization Personal Data