The Artificial Intelligence Act Between the EU and National Levels

This article examines the complex legal and policy dimensions of the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA), focusing on its implementation in Slovenia. Although the AIA is a binding regulation directly applicable in all EU Member States, its hybrid nature—part legal mandate, part policy guideline—creates interpretative and practical challenges, especially for national administrative authorities. Using a three-stage methodology (normative analysis, expert survey, and focus group discussions), the study examined how Slovenian authorities perceive the AIA’s legal character, scope of application, and implementation obligations. Respondents included both institutional (ministries) and operational (tax and social services) authorities. While most recognised the formal status of the AIA as law, significant discrepancies were found in terms of awareness and readiness. Operational authorities such as the Centre for Social Work often viewed the AIA as a guideline rather than a binding regulation. Knowledge of related EU legislation (e.g., GDPR, Digital Services Act) varied from authority to authority, which impacted implementation strategies. The findings reveal three critical gaps: legal misinterpretation, institutional readiness, and actual application. Despite a shared understanding of the importance of the AIA, implementation measures, such as training, clear role definitions, and inter-agency collaboration, were insufficient or delayed. In addition, the authorities did not sufficiently recognise their role and the need for national coordination. The study concludes that effective implementation of the AIA requires not only legal clarity, but also structured action plans, sustained intergovernmental cooperation, and practical support mechanisms. These findings are especially relevant for smaller EU states, where legal formalism and limited resources hinder policy implementation. Slovenia’s experience serves as a cautionary tale and a learning opportunity for other Member States grappling with the multi-level governance of AI regulation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Hrvatska i komparativna javna uprava
Published
2025-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31297/hkju.25.3.6
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Artificial Intelligence Act Between the EU and National Levels

Matej Babšek, Polonca Kovać, Aleksander Aristovnik
Hrvatska i komparativna javna uprava
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

The Artificial Intelligence Act Between the EU and National Levels

Matej Babšek, Polonca Kovać, Aleksander Aristovnik
article en

Abstract

This article examines the complex legal and policy dimensions of the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA), focusing on its implementation in Slovenia. Although the AIA is a binding regulation directly applicable in all EU Member States, its hybrid nature—part legal mandate, part policy guideline—creates interpretative and practical challenges, especially for national administrative authorities. Using a three-stage methodology (normative analysis, expert survey, and focus group discussions), the study examined how Slovenian authorities perceive the AIA’s legal character, scope of application, and implementation obligations. Respondents included both institutional (ministries) and operational (tax and social services) authorities. While most recognised the formal status of the AIA as law, significant discrepancies were found in terms of awareness and readiness. Operational authorities such as the Centre for Social Work often viewed the AIA as a guideline rather than a binding regulation. Knowledge of related EU legislation (e.g., GDPR, Digital Services Act) varied from authority to authority, which impacted implementation strategies. The findings reveal three critical gaps: legal misinterpretation, institutional readiness, and actual application. Despite a shared understanding of the importance of the AIA, implementation measures, such as training, clear role definitions, and inter-agency collaboration, were insufficient or delayed. In addition, the authorities did not sufficiently recognise their role and the need for national coordination. The study concludes that effective implementation of the AIA requires not only legal clarity, but also structured action plans, sustained intergovernmental cooperation, and practical support mechanisms. These findings are especially relevant for smaller EU states, where legal formalism and limited resources hinder policy implementation. Slovenia’s experience serves as a cautionary tale and a learning opportunity for other Member States grappling with the multi-level governance of AI regulation.

Hrvatska i komparativna javna upravaVol. 25(3)
University of Ljubljana (SI)
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.