LexLint.ioBeta

Know the law your code answers to.

Law / Moldova

Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, signed by Moldova

This is a Council of Europe treaty, not European Union law. The Council of Europe is a separate international organization, with wider and different membership than the EU.

Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights Democracy and the Rule of Law, Council of Europe Treaty Series No. 225, opened for signature ; signed by the Republic of Moldova, not yet ratified

Signed, with consent not yet expressed, dated , as of .

An AI governance rule binding public and private bodies.

Obligation class
Disclosure, DPIA, Governance
Audit expectation
continuous
Who audits it
Regulator, Self
Where the report goes
Kept

Where it has got to

The text described here is Certified copy of the Convention in its corrected version per the Committee of Ministers' decision at the 1527th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies. That print is CETS 225, published .

The stage above is recorded at www.coe.int.

More on this stage

The Treaty Office chart of signatures and ratifications, read with a stated status as of , records one ratification in total (the European Union, ) against twenty signatures not followed by ratification, and entry into force requires five ratifications including at least three Council of Europe member states. So the treaty has not entered into force for any state and no state has done more than sign it.

The source link is the Treaty Office's own detail page for the Convention rather than the certified copy itself, because rm.coe.int refuses the crawler outright.

What it requires

  • Each Party to the Convention must adopt or maintain measures for the identification, assessment, prevention and mitigation of risks posed by artificial intelligence systems, considering their actual and potential impacts on human rights, democracy and the rule of law (Article 16(1)).NIST AI RMFMAP 5.1NIST AI RMFMANAGE 1.3
  • Each Party must seek to ensure, as appropriate for the context, that persons interacting with an AI system are notified that they are interacting with such a system rather than with a human, and must adopt or maintain measures for accessible and effective remedies, as far as its international obligations require and its domestic legal system allows, including measures to ensure that information about an AI system is sufficient for affected persons to contest a decision made or substantially informed by its use.NIST AI RMFMEASURE 2.8NIST AI RMFMEASURE 3.3

These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.

In the frameworks

NIST AI RMF
  • MAP 5.1Likelihood and magnitude of each identified impact (both potentially beneficial and harmful) based on expected use, past uses of AI systems in similar contexts, public incident reports, feedback from those external to the team that developed or deployed the AI system, or other data are identified and documented.
  • MEASURE 2.8Risks associated with transparency and accountability – as identified in the MAP function – are examined and documented.
  • MEASURE 3.3Feedback processes for end users and impacted communities to report problems and appeal system outcomes are established and integrated into AI system evaluation metrics.
  • MANAGE 1.3Responses to the AI risks deemed high priority, as identified by the MAP function, are developed, planned, and documented. Risk response options can include mitigating, transferring, avoiding, or accepting.
NIST AI 600-1
NIST AI 200-2 Draft
  • 2.4Synthesize & Interrogate
MIT mitigations Draft
  • 1.2Risk Management
  • 1.7Societal Impact Assessment
  • 3.1Testing & Auditing
  • 4.1System Documentation
  • 4.2Risk Disclosure
  • 4.6User Rights & Recourse
FINOS AIGF
ETSI EN 304 223
  • 5.1.2-1Business need and security risks written down and assessed before deciding to build an AI system.
  • 5.1.3-1Threat modelling and risk management, reviewed regularly and covering AI-specific attacks.
  • 5.1.3-2Threats developers cannot resolve are passed to operators and on to end-users.
  • 5.3.1-1Users told where and how their data is used, accessed and stored, with developers informing operators.
  • 5.3.1-2.1That guidance covers proper use, limits and likely failure modes.

Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework, and in the NIST AI RMF, line by line beside each duty above. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law

Identifiers refer to ETSI EN 304 223 V2.1.1 (2025-12), © ETSI 2025, all rights reserved. ETSI owns the standard; no ETSI text (titles or sentences) is reproduced here. The standard is free to download from ETSI.

What it makes you log

Who may demand the log

Regulator, Data subject

What the log must hold

System identity, Decision basis

Logging duty

The Convention never uses the words log or record. Article 14(2)(a) obliges each Party to adopt measures ensuring that relevant information about AI systems that can significantly affect human rights, and their usage, is documented and provided to authorised bodies, and Article 16(2)(f) requires the risk-management measures to include documentation of risks, impacts and the risk management approach. That information cannot be provided or shown without a record the operator keeps. The duty binds the Party to adopt measures; it reaches an operator only through the Party's implementing law, and Moldova has not ratified.

Kind
Implicit
As of
Provision
Article 14(2)(a) and (b); Article 16(2)(f) and Article 16(3)
Trigger
  • high_risk_systems
  • automated_decisions

What this law does

Drafted with AI

Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page. How this site is made

Research summary

Legal information, not legal advice. This is LexLint's own research summary of a public legal source, and it creates no attorney-client relationship. For decisions that matter, consult qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. About LexLint

The Council of Europe's own list of signatories to the Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence names the Republic of Moldova as a signatory. The Treaty Office's chart of signatures and ratifications records Moldova's signature on and no ratification by Moldova. The only ratification the chart records, as of its status date of , is the European Union's, on .

Under Article 30(3) the Convention enters into force on the first day of the month following three months after five signatories, including at least three Council of Europe member states, have expressed their consent to be bound by it.

The Convention requires each Party to adopt measures that keep activities within the lifecycle of an artificial intelligence system consistent with human dignity, equality and non-discrimination, privacy, transparency and accountability, including carrying out iterative risk and impact assessments on human rights, democracy and the rule of law and establishing prevention and mitigation measures.

It covers use of an AI system by a public authority, including a private actor acting on the authority's behalf, and by a private actor generally, and it requires each Party to seek to ensure, as appropriate for the context, that persons interacting with an AI system are notified that they are interacting with such a system rather than with a human being, and to adopt or maintain measures for accessible and effective remedies, as far as its international obligations require and its domestic legal system allows, including measures to ensure that information about an AI system is sufficient for affected persons to contest a decision made or substantially informed by its use.

When LexLint raises it

When your app profile says your app deploys a chatbot, makes high-risk automated decisions or generates content with AI.

Back to the example  ·  Lint your app

Page updated .