The efforts of the parliament to organize the field of artificial intelligence in the form of a specialized fraction have now given rise to whispers about the possibility of establishing an independent ministry. This proposal has been raised by several representatives and private sector activists and is apparently set to be examined by research centers. All of these efforts come at a time when the progress of artificial intelligence in the country is not yet very noticeable.
According to IDEA, recent news in the field of technology suggests that the attention of the country’s policymakers has been drawn to artificial intelligence and related technologies. Policymakers are so serious about pursuing this issue that, in addition to the parliament’s intention to form an AI fraction, other whispers about the possibility of establishing an independent ministry in this field are also heard. Now, with a review of the history of policymakers in pursuing protection plans and subsequently imposing restrictions in other technology sectors, especially the internet, the question arises as to whether relatively emerging actors in this field should be concerned about the policymakers’ willingness to enter this sector or perceive it as a hopeful initiative for greater support?
Members of Parliament Considering a New Fraction
According to the Parliament’s view, it is planned that Reza Taghipour will lead the Artificial Intelligence and Data Governance Fraction, with the task of legislating and organizing this field. Taghipour is one of the representatives whose name is well-known to social media users, and he has been heard in the process of approving the controversial plan known as ‘Preservation of AI’ several times. As reported, the fourth session of the recent Artificial Intelligence Fraction was held with the topic of ‘Confronting Artificial Intelligence’, apparently involving not only members of the fraction and representatives from think tanks and research centers but also several private sector actors.
In a part of this session, Taghipour had mentioned that there were criticisms about the government’s involvement in the legislative discussions of this field. He had said, ‘Some friends criticized the fact that we are only attempting to draft documents in the field of artificial intelligence. However, it should be noted that usually when new phenomena enter society, various institutions, especially government institutions, need these documents and legal frameworks to take action.’ Referring to the fact that the seventh development plan is currently the center of attention, he considered this plan a suitable starting point for entering this technological field. He emphasized that the output suggestions from these sessions gradually go through evaluation, revision, completion, and are incorporated into the seventh development plan.
Head of the Artificial Intelligence and Data Governance Fraction, in another part of his statements, had emphasized the necessity of establishing such a fraction. He said, ‘It is very important that in addition to the government and the place where programs are approved, we define a separate structure as the core of this subject so that discussions and opinions about the quality of programs and various indicators can take place.’ Taghipour believes that through these collaborative discussions, an appropriate regulatory institution can also be predicted and defined for these programs.
Possibility of Establishing an Independent Ministry
The emphasis on the need for an independent institution to address topics related to artificial intelligence is not limited to the Parliament, and alongside it, other individuals within various branches of the government have also discussed this matter. In one such instance, not long ago, Mohammad Razavizadeh, the head of the Communication Research Institute, also welcomed the focus on AI legislation in the seventh development plan, stating that many entities are making decisions in the field of artificial intelligence, but there is no specific responsible body, and it is expected that through this process, the head of artificial intelligence in the country will eventually be identified.
In this regard, it has recently been heard that some members of the Parliament are discussing the formation of a ministry for artificial intelligence, and the possibility of implementing this decision is gaining strength. One of the private sector actors who participated in the specialized sessions held by the Parliament’s Artificial Intelligence Fraction also mentioned the possibility of forming an AI ministry to ‘Donya-ye-Eqtesad’ (a financial newspaper): This proposal has been put forward by both private sector actors and some members of the Parliament and is being pursued. However, it seems that the main responsible body for managing this field is still the Supreme Council of Cyberspace.
In continuation of these efforts, on Saturday, Mohammad Mehdi Zahedi, a member of the Parliament’s Education and Research Commission, in an interview with IRNA, provided details about the necessity of establishing a specialized institution to manage this field. This discussion has further fueled the likelihood of forming a Ministry of Artificial Intelligence. Zahedi, in explaining the different scenarios for managing this field, stated: One of these scenarios is the establishment of a central authority under the supervision of the presidency to take on this responsibility. However, management experiences in the country have shown that subordinate centers under the presidency, such as the National Cyberspace Center and Efta, do not have the necessary agility to handle this responsibility. The second solution is to assign the responsibility of artificial intelligence to an existing ministry, with the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology being the most logical option. He believes that in this scenario, an affiliated organization within that ministry, like the Information Technology Organization, will be responsible for AI and will not have the necessary position for interaction with other ministries and the three branches of government. This can be seen in the tasks related to e-government. In this regard, Zahedi proposed a third solution, which is the formation of a new and independent ministry, and added: ‘This ministry, given its organizational position, will be responsible for AI in all policy layers from planning to execution, and other ministries and government entities will be obligated to interact and cooperate with this ministry.’
This member of the Parliament’s Education and Research Commission also explained how necessary studies for such an initiative should be conducted and what the background for the establishment of such a ministry is. He stated: ‘It seems that the best choice for conducting such work is the Parliament’s Research Center, which presents the results of its studies and research in the form of proposed bills to the Parliament and has the capacity to turn them into law.’ He continued, saying: ‘The examinations show that this center has also conducted various studies in this field in recent years and is now fully prepared to address this issue.’
Worrisome or Hopeful?
With all of this in mind, regardless of which authority or institution assumes the primary responsibility for managing and regulating the field of artificial intelligence in the country, there is a question of whether the seriousness of the government in establishing an independent and specialized institution to address this emerging technology should be seen as hopeful or a cause for concern. In this regard, Nima Shamsapour, a private sector actor engaged in providing AI-based digital services, told ‘Donya-ye-Eqtesad’ (a financial newspaper): ‘Around the world, when governments and legislative bodies pay special attention to technology trends, it has both positive and negative effects. Therefore, one cannot look at this issue in black and white.’
In explaining the positive effects of the recent attention, he said: ‘In general, when legislators pay attention to a specific field, it also attracts the attention of various other sectors, which can potentially lead to more resources, facilities, and investments in that field.’ He believes that progress in the field of artificial intelligence requires infrastructure development, which, in total, requires substantial investments. Such attention can make the path to creating this infrastructure smoother. Shamsapour also believes that another positive outcome of this attention can be the opening up of AI and its tools for research and examination by senior managers in the country. He stated: ‘Without a doubt, with the existing tools, AI assistants can be much more efficient than human assistants, and utilizing the capacities of this technology for searching for similar examples that have been implemented in other parts of the world can improve the speed and quality of outputs.’
This technology expert points out that AI is currently at the center of attention not only in Iran but worldwide, and he addresses one of the negative aspects of these occasional and sometimes excessive attentions: ‘Generally, during times when a technology is trending and is not managed properly, it can lead to disappointment among stakeholders and policymakers in this field and ultimately lead to the withdrawal of investments made in this field.’
Another concern that can arise from this serious policy attention to artificial intelligence is the possibility of legal barriers to the development of this technology. Shamsapour explains this perspective, saying: ‘The reality is that the development of artificial intelligence is impossible without access to large datasets and serious investments in this field. Until now, these investments have been made by the private sector, but government assistance is a catalyst for further progress in all parts of the world. Now, the same is true for our country. If the right individuals are in decision-making positions in this field, the establishment of such new institutions can be very beneficial and hopeful. However, if a different approach is taken, it may even hinder progress in this field.’
In summary, it seems that the country’s policymakers are considering the path of further development of AI-related technologies through the creation of a new institution for monitoring and managing this field, following the example of other countries like the United Arab Emirates, which has a specialized ministry for artificial intelligence. However, it should be noted that with the significant investments that countries like the UAE and Saudi Arabia have made in the field of AI, their progress in this area is noticeably different from ours. Now, given the current status and the presence of the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, the nature of such a new ministry may lead to parallel work and create difficulties in overseeing its performance. It remains to be seen how this decision will be evaluated and implemented by experts. Since this topic has been under consideration by policymakers for a long time, a thorough examination of the various dimensions of this action and its potential consequences is still necessary. However, the current details provided by the Parliament members indicate that the AI Fraction plans to focus on launching a platform and producing native AI-based products and their export.
No Comment! Be the first one.