Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence - Footnote 8
1 evidence check
Last checked: 4/3/2026
The claim mentions that the treaty has been signed by EU member states and over 50 countries including non-CoE members such as the United States, Japan, Israel, and various Latin American nations, reflecting its broad international appeal. However, the source does not provide a specific number of countries that have signed the treaty, nor does it mention specific countries like the United States, Japan, Israel, or Latin American nations as signatories. The claim mentions that the convention employs a risk-based approach requiring parties to conduct dynamic risk and impact assessments and implement graduated mitigation measures—including potential bans or moratoria—for AI uses incompatible with human rights. The source mentions that the EU AI Act introduces a risk-based framework, but it does not explicitly state that the convention itself employs a risk-based approach or requires parties to conduct dynamic risk and impact assessments and implement graduated mitigation measures—including potential bans or moratoria—for AI uses incompatible with human rights.
Evidence — 1 source, 1 check
Note: The claim mentions that the treaty has been signed by EU member states and over 50 countries including non-CoE members such as the United States, Japan, Israel, and various Latin American nations, reflecting its broad international appeal. However, the source does not provide a specific number of countries that have signed the treaty, nor does it mention specific countries like the United States, Japan, Israel, or Latin American nations as signatories. The claim mentions that the convention employs a risk-based approach requiring parties to conduct dynamic risk and impact assessments and implement graduated mitigation measures—including potential bans or moratoria—for AI uses incompatible with human rights. The source mentions that the EU AI Act introduces a risk-based framework, but it does not explicitly state that the convention itself employs a risk-based approach or requires parties to conduct dynamic risk and impact assessments and implement graduated mitigation measures—including potential bans or moratoria—for AI uses incompatible with human rights.
Debug info
Record type: citation
Record ID: page:coe-ai-convention:fn8