# AI Act General Procedural Framework — legal context bundle > Curated from overview.legal on 2026-08-22. Canonical page: https://overview.legal/topics/ai-act-general-procedures-framework > Sources are cited per item. Verify against the official texts before relying on them. The source document is specifically titled 'Procedure' from the AI Act, suggesting a comprehensive procedural section that warrants a dedicated topic covering the general procedural framework, mechanisms, and requirements applicable across the regulation. ## Overview ## Legal Framework The general procedural framework for the AI Act is established primarily in **Articles 63 through 71** of the Regulation. These articles create a cohesive procedural architecture for market surveillance, conformity assessment, and enforcement. The framework mandates that Member States designate national competent authorities and market surveillance authorities, outlining their powers and obligations. Key procedures include those for investigating AI systems presenting a risk, handling non-compliant systems, and facilitating cross-border cooperation through an information-sharing system (AI regulatory sandboxes and real-world testing are governed by separate procedural rules in Articles 53 and 57, respectively). Recital 60, while focused on a specific domain, underscores the procedural imperative for authorities to ensure the accuracy, non-discrimination, and transparency of AI systems, given their profound impact on fundamental rights. ## Practical Application The procedural framework is designed for a coordinated EU-wide enforcement model. In practice, this means national market surveillance authorities act as the primary front-line investigators, utilizing their powers under Article 65 to require information, conduct inspections, and test systems. A critical procedural mechanism is the mandatory consultation and cooperation process outlined in Article 66. Before adopting measures against a non-compliant AI system, an authority must consult with the provider and the relevant notified body, if applicable, and notify other Member States through the dedicated information system. This prevents fragmented enforcement and ensures a consistent regulatory approach across the single market. ## Key Considerations * **Map Your Supervisory Landscape:** Providers must identify the relevant market surveillance authority in each Member State where their high-risk AI system is placed on the market or put into service, as procedural actions will originate from these national bodies. * **Prepare for Investigative Powers:** Organizations must have internal procedures to promptly respond to formal information requests and potential on-site inspections from authorities, including providing access to data and documentation as required under Article 65. * **Engage in Mandatory Consultation:** If notified of potential non-compliance, actively engage in the Article 66 consultation procedure with the authority and your notified body; this is a formal opportunity to provide corrective input before enforcement measures are finalized. ## Legislation (full text of key provisions) ### Recital 60 — high-risk AI migration border control *Source: AI Act, aiact-rec-60-en, 2024-06-12 — https://overview.legal/posts/93802* AI systems used in migration, asylum and border control management affect persons who are often in particularly vulnerable position and who are dependent on the outcome of the actions of the competent public authorities. The accuracy, non-discriminatory nature and transparency of the AI systems used in those contexts are therefore particularly important to guarantee respect for the fundamental rights of the affected persons, in particular their rights to free movement, non-discrimination, protection of private life and personal data, international protection and good administration. It is therefore appropriate to classify as high-risk, insofar as their use is permitted under relevant Union and national law, AI systems intended to be used by or on behalf of competent public authorities or by Union institutions, bodies, offices or agencies charged with tasks in the fields of migration, asylum and border control management as polygraphs and similar tools, for assessing certain risks posed by natural persons entering the territory of a Member State or applying for visa or asylum, for assisting competent public authorities for the examination, including related assessment of the reliability of evidence, of applications for asylum, visa and residence permits and associated complaints with regard to the objective to establish the eligibility of the natural persons applying for a status, for the purpose of detecting, recognising or identifying natural persons in the context of migration, asylum and border control management, with the exception of verification of travel documents. AI systems in the area of migration, asylum and border control management covered by this Regulation should comply with the relevant procedural requirements set by the Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (32), the Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (33), and other relevant Union law. The use of AI systems in migration, asylum and border control management should, in no circumstances, be used by Member States or Union institutions, bodies, offices or agencies as a means to circumvent their international obligations under the UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees done at Geneva on 28 July 1951 as amended by the Protocol of 31 January 1967. Nor should they be used to in any way infringe on the principle of non-refoulement, or to deny safe and effective legal avenues into the territory of the Union, including the right to international protection. ## Related topics - **Implementation Guidelines** — https://overview.legal/topics/commission-implementation-guidelines This content is specifically about Commission guidelines for implementing the AI Act. A dedicated topic would capture guidance documents, interpretive materials - **Committee Procedure under AI Act** — https://overview.legal/topics/committee-procedure-ai-act The content specifically addresses 'Committee procedure' as a distinct procedural mechanism under the AI Act. This topic is not adequately covered by existing t - **Annex III High-Risk AI Categories** — https://overview.legal/topics/annex-iii-high-risk-categories The classification rules reference specific categories of high-risk AI systems listed in Annex III, which warrant a dedicated topic to address the enumerated us - **Delegation of Powers** — https://overview.legal/topics/delegation-of-powers-procedures The content specifically addresses 'Exercise of the delegation' which is a distinct procedural topic covering how delegated powers are exercised, implemented, a - **Transparency** — https://overview.legal/topics/transparantie Openness about data processing activities - **AI Office Establishment and Role** — https://overview.legal/topics/ai-office-establishment-role The AI Office is a new institutional body created by the AI Act with specific establishment procedures, roles, responsibilities, and governance structures that --- Generated by overview.legal · https://overview.legal/topics/ai-act-general-procedures-framework · 2026-08-22