high-risk uses
AI uses with significant potential harm to rights, safety or wellbeing.
How the laws define this
High-risk AI uses consistently refer to deployments whose potential impact on rights, safety, legal status, or essential well-being triggers heightened regulatory safeguards, mandatory oversight, and risk assessments. Every framework agrees that applications significantly threatening fundamental interests require heightened compliance measures, including pre-deployment controls, transparency, and impact assessments. The primary divergence lies in the scope of protected interests and available remedies. The Federal Council decision to ratify the Council of Europe Convention on Artificial Intelligence uniquely expands high-risk threats to encompass democratic processes and the rule of law, explicitly introducing remedies like prohibitions or moratoria. In contrast, the National Strategy in the field of Artificial Intelligence 2024-2027 focuses on health, safety, and fundamental rights aligned with the EU framework, while Supreme Decree No. 115-2025-PCM — Regulation of Law No. 31814 and the National Artificial Intelligence Strategy — Working Document for Citizen Participation 2021–2026 emphasize access to essential services, administrative outcomes, and explicit operational requirements like security audits and DPIAs.
Synthesised from the 5 statutory definitions below. Each one is quoted in full, with its source.
Definitions (5)
High‑risk uses are applications or deployments of AI that, based on their purpose and context, have the potential to significantly affect people’s rights, safety, legal status or wellbeing. The framework advises that such uses be subject to more rigorous, proportionate assurance measures including enhanced testing, human oversight, transparency and redress mechanisms.
AI applications or deployments whose scale, impact or domain (e.g., health, justice, social services) carry substantial potential to affect individuals' rights, access to essential services or legal/administrative outcomes, and that therefore require ex-ante impact assessments and strengthened safeguards.
Uses of AI systems that present significant threats to human rights, democratic processes or the rule of law and which therefore attract heightened obligations such as enhanced risk assessment, stricter oversight, possible prohibitions or moratoria and access to remedies.
Uses of AI systems that carry significant risks to health, safety or fundamental rights as characterised in the EU framework; the Strategy references this concept to prioritise safeguards, conformity roadmaps and sectoral regulatory attention in line with the EU AI Act.
Use cases or AI systems whose deployment poses significant risks to rights, safety or fundamental interests and that the Regulation expressly classifies as requiring mandatory measures (e.g., DPIAs, human oversight, transparency, security audits and documentation). High‑risk uses trigger specific obligations for developers, implementers and public entities, including retention of impact assessments and pre‑deployment controls.
Related Terms
high-risk use cases
Public‑interest deployments with significant impact on rights or services....
High-risk applications
Uses that affect fundamental rights, health, safety, or livelihoods....
High‑impact uses
Uses that materially affect rights, health, safety, or livelihoods....
High‑risk application
AI uses with significant impacts on life, rights, or critical infrastructure....
high-risk/high-impact applications
Uses that could materially harm health, safety, rights or environment....