LONDON — On the face of it, the new MI6 chief’s first speech featured many of the same villains and heroes as those of her predecessors. But in her first public outing Monday, Blaise Metreweli, the first female head of the U.K.’s foreign intelligence service, sent a strong signal that she intends to put her own stamp on the role – as she highlighted a wave of inter-connected threats to western democracies. Speaking at MI6’s HQ in London, Metreweli, who took over from Richard Moore in October, highlighted a confluence of geo-political and technological disruptions, warning “the frontline is everywhere” and adding “we are now operating in a space between peace and war.” In a speech shot through with references to a shifting transatlantic order and the growth of disinformation, Metreweli made noticeably scant  reference to the historically close relationship with the U.S. in intelligence gathering — the mainstay of the U.K.’s intelligence compact for decades. Instead, she highlighted that a “new bloc and identities are forming and alliances reshaping.” That will be widely seen to reflect an official acknowledgement that the second Donald Trump administration has necessitated a shift in the security services towards cultivating more multilateral relationships. By comparison with a lengthy passage on the seriousness of the Russia threat to Britain, China got away only with a light mention of its cyber attack tendencies towards the U.K. — and was referred to more flatteringly as “a country where a central transformation  is  taking place this century.” Westminster hawks will note that Metreweli — who grew up in Hong Kong and  so knows the Chinese system close-up — walked gingerly around the risk of conflict in the  South China Sea and Beijing’s espionage activities targeting British politicians – and even its royals. In a carefully-placed line, she reflected that she was  “going to break with tradition and won’t give you a global threat tour.” Moore, her predecessor, was known for that approach, which delighted those who enjoyed a plain-speaking MI6 boss giving pithy analysis of global tensions and their fallout, but frustrated some in the Foreign Office who believed the affable Moore could be too unguarded in his comments on geo-politics. The implicit suggestion from the new chief was that China needs to be handled differently to the forthright engagement with “aggressive, expansionist and revisionist” Russia. The reasons may well lie in the aftermath of a bruising argument within Whitehall about how to handle the recent case of two Britons who were arrested for spying for China, and with a growth-boosting visit to Beijing by the prime minister scheduled for 2026. Sources in the service suggest the aim of the China strategy is to avoid confrontation, the better to further intelligence-gathering and have a more productive economic relationship with Beijing. More hardline interpreters of the Secret Intelligence Service will raise eyebrows at her suggestion that the “convening power” of the service would enable it to “ defuse tensions.” But there was no doubt about Metreweli’s deep concern at the impacts of social-media disinformation and distortion, in a framing which seemed just as worried about U.S. tech titans as conventional state-run threats:  “We are being contested from battlefield to boardroom — and even our brains — as disinformation manipulates our understanding of each other.” Declaring that “some  algorithms become as powerful as states,” seemed to tilt at outfits like Elon Musk’s X and Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta-owned Facebook. Metreweli warned that “hyper personalized tools could become a new vector for conflict and control,” pushing their effects on societies and individuals  in “minutes not months – my service must operate in this new context too.” The new boss used the possessive pronoun, talking about “my service” in her speech several times – another sign that she intends to put a distinctive mark of the job, now that she has, at the age of just 48,  inherited the famous green-ink pen in which the head of the service signs correspondence.  Metreweli is experienced operator in war zones including Iraq who spent a secondment with MI5, the domestic intelligence service, and won the job in large part because of her experience in the top job via MI6’s science and technology “Q”  Branch. She clearly wants to expedite changes in the service – saying agents must be as fluent in computer coding as foreign languages. She is also expected to try and address a tendency in the service to harvest information, without a clear focus on the action that should follow – the product of a glut of intelligence gathered via digital means and AI. She  was keen to stress that the human factor is at the heart of it all — an attempt at reassurance for spies and analysts wondering if they might be replaced by AI agents as the job of gathering intelligence in the era of facial recognition and biometrics gets harder.  Armed with a steely gaze Metreweli speaks fluent human, occasionally with a small smile. She is also the first incumbent of the job to wear a very large costume jewelry beetle brooch on her sombre navy attire. No small amount of attention in Moscow and Beijing could go into decoding that.

Belgium’s government issued new travel guidance on Friday for Belgian nationals heading to Hungary, amid rising tensions around the Budapest Pride march set for Saturday. “We remind you that participation in a demonstration that is not allowed by the Hungarian authorities is the responsibility of each individual participant,” Belgium’s foreign ministry said in a statement. “We advise any participants to exercise the necessary vigilance and to keep up to date with the current situation through the media and social media of the embassy in Budapest,” it said. Participants should keep distance from possible counter-demonstrations, “and in the event of disturbances, follow the guidelines of the local police.” The warning follows a decision by Hungarian police on June 19 to ban the annual LGBTQ+ march scheduled for Saturday. Authorities cited a law passed in March that asserts the protection of children must take precedence over the right to assembly. Following the new legislation, both the U.K. and Canada updated their travel advisories for Hungary ahead of the march, warning that participants could face criminal penalties or fines under new legislation that bans Pride parades and allows police to use facial recognition to identify attendees. On May 26, a coalition of at least 16 EU countries — including the Netherlands, Germany, Finland, Denmark, France, Sweden and Austria — issued a joint statement condemning the Pride ban and urging the European Commission to take action. On Thursday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen released a video statement calling on Hungarian authorities to reverse the decision. “I call on the Hungarian authorities to allow the Budapest Pride to go ahead,” she said. “To the LGBTIQ+ community in Hungary and beyond: I will always be your ally.” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán swiftly responded, criticizing what he described as EU overreach. He stated that the European Commission should “refrain from interfering in the law enforcement affairs of member states,” adding that it is a matter “where it has no role to play.” In an interview with Hungary’s Kossuth Radio on Friday, Orbán reaffirmed his position and warned of “legal consequences” for those who defy the ban. “We are adults, and I recommend that everyone should decide what they want, keep to the rules … and if they don’t, then they should face the clear legal consequences,” he said.

BRUSSELS — Rights groups are pleading with the European Commission to intervene against Hungary’s potential use of facial recognition technology to identify attendees of the banned Pride this weekend in Budapest. Dozens of digital and human rights groups said Hungary’s use of the technology is “a glaring violation” of the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act, in an open letter sent to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and her colleagues in charge of technology, rule of law and equality, first reported by POLITICO. The groups want Brussels to open an infringement procedure against Hungary for breaking EU law. Such a step would add to ongoing tensions between Brussels and Budapest over whether the Hungarian government abides by the EU’s rule of law standards. So far, Brussels has only said it is looking at the matter — despite the fact Budapest Pride will take place on Saturday. The EU executive hasn’t responded to questions filed by dozens of European Parliament lawmakers. In April, POLITICO reported that the Commission was “assessing” a Hungarian law that allows police to use facial recognition technology to identify those at Pride events and would not “hesitate to take action, where appropriate.” Civil society is enraged by the silence since. “The inaction of the Commission to enforce fundamental and digital rights, despite urging from civil society, is deeply concerning,” said Blue Tiyavorabun, policy adviser at digital rights group EDRi, one of the signatories of the letter. The Commission didn’t respond to multiple requests to comment for this article. Hungary in mid-March banned Pride gatherings, saying the move was designed to protect children. With a series of amendments to existing laws, it opened the door for its police forces to use face scanning for any type of offense — including attending a banned gathering such as Pride. Brussels has only said it is looking at the matter — despite the fact Budapest Pride will take place on Saturday. | Zoltan Mathe/EFE via EPA If the facial recognition occurs in real-time, that would amount to a breach of the EU’s AI Act. The law forbids real-time biometric identification in public places by law enforcers, a rule that came into effect in February. Hungary’s case marks “the first known violation of the prohibitions,” the rights groups wrote in their letter, saying it would set a “worrying precedent.” “If unaddressed, this can cause a domino effect where other member states might feel emboldened to adopt similar legislation,” they wrote. But the Commission still has to assess whether Hungary’s use of the technology amounts to “real-time” use. The EU’s AI rulebook is less strict about biometric identification that is not deployed in real-time. For instance, such biometric identification would be allowed with court approval for specific criminal offenses after the facts took place. The digital and human rights groups are attempting to convince Brussels that Hungary’s system permits authorities to act “in ways that should be considered real-time,” according to the legal analysis they shared with the Commission, seen by POLITICO. Hungarian authorities haven’t released details on how the technology would be deployed, but the Hungarian Council for Civil Liberties Union compiled a list of questions and answers that makes some claims about the system. Facial recognition is performed based on still images, and the system can only identify individuals with a Hungarian photo ID, as the pictures are compared to a facial profile registry maintained by the Hungarian Institute for Forensic Sciences (HIFS), the Hungarian Council for Civil Liberties said in the list of questions and answers. The registry does not contain actual photographs but a “biometric identifier,” it said. In their legal analysis, the rights groups say the police could connect directly to the systems of the HIFS and see on the spot whether there’s a match between the image and the biometric identifier. That would fit the AI Act’s definition of real-time, which is “without significant delay,” they said. HIFS didn’t respond to a request for comment. A Hungarian government spokesperson said in April it believed “all is in line with our constitution and EU law.” Several high-profile European politicians are expected to attend Pride on Saturday, among them Equality Commissioner Hadja Lahbib, the chairs of the Socialist, liberal and Green groups, Spain’s Culture Minister Ernest Urtasun, Dutch Education Minister Eppo Bruins, former Belgian Prime Minister Elio Di Rupo and former Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar.  Kim van Sparrentak, one of the AI Act’s co-drafters, has also said she’ll attend the parade. Von der Leyen on Wednesday night called on Hungary to allow the Budapest Pride to go ahead “without fear of any criminal or administrative sanctions against the organisers or participants.” In response, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said he would “urge the European Commission to refrain from interfering in the law enforcement affairs of member states, where it has no role to play.”

Hungary is violating European Union law by cracking down on LGBTQ+ content children might be exposed to, a top adviser at the European Union’s highest court said on Thursday. The legal opinion comes ahead of a final ruling by the Court of Justice of the EU that could force Viktor Orbán’s government to scrap one of its most controversial laws — a 2021 law restricting and banning the representation and “promotion” of homosexuality and gender transition across all media accessible to children. Hungary “has significantly deviated from the model of a constitutional democracy,” the court’s Advocate General Tamara Ćapeta found, according to a press release. Budapest’s rules “are based on a value judgment that homosexual and non-cisgender life is not of equal value or status as heterosexual and cisgender life,” the press release added. The opinion gives the European Commission clout in its clash with Budapest over fundamental rights, which most recently escalated after Orbán’s government banned Pride events in mid-March and authorized police to use biometric cameras to identify organizers and attendees. Advocate-general opinions are nonbinding. However, they do often signal where the court will land in its final ruling, which usually comes out within months following the opinion. The European Commission opened an infringement procedure in July 2021 after Hungary adopted the law, which seeks to bar children from seeing LGBTQ+ content across television programs and advertisements, books, sex education classes and beyond. Same-sex couples and transgender people are banned from daytime TV and ads, while queer-themed books must be sealed and can’t be sold near schools and churches. Budapest invoked the EU’s audiovisual media rulebook and its provisions on protecting minors from harmful content as a legal basis to limit the visibility of LGBTQ+ communities on television. “The Hungarian bill is a shame,” Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in 2021, vowing to use “all the powers of the Commission to ensure that the rights of all EU citizens are guaranteed, whoever you are and wherever you live.” In December 2022, the EU executive took the case to court and got the backing of 15 member countries and the European Parliament. The Hungarian provisions infringe a series of EU laws and interfere with fundamental rights, Ćapeta said Thursday, arguing the infringement procedure is “founded.” If the court confirmed that the 2021 provisions are unlawful, Hungary could face a hefty fine and be forced to roll them back. In its latest move against LGBTQ+ rights, Hungary’s parliament passed a law in March banning Pride events and authorized police to use biometric surveillance to identify organizers and attendees. These measures are under EU scrutiny for potentially breaching new artificial intelligence rules that prohibit real-time facial recognition. The European Commission and the Hungarian government have not yet responded to a request for comment about Thursday’s court opinion. The case is C-769/22.

BRUSSELS — The European Union is looking into whether Hungary’s plan to deploy facial recognition technology to identify people attending LGBTQ+ Pride events is illegal. The move by the EU, reported exclusively by POLITICO, sets up the latest clash between Brussels and Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government as Hungary becomes an increasingly troublesome member of the bloc. It also marks the first real test of landmark EU artificial intelligence rules that critics say contain too many exemptions to effectively protect against abusive uses of technology.  Hungary in mid-March banned Pride gatherings and changed its laws to allow police to use biometric cameras to identify protestors who attend such events. The government said it had done so to protect children from the LGBTQ+ agenda, but opponents say Budapest is stoking an anti-LGBTQ+ campaign to garner far-right support — and is hitting the limits of EU legality. The European Commission is “currently assessing” the Hungarian law to see whether it complies with the bloc’s AI Act, Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier told POLITICO. One of the things the Commission needs to decide is whether facial recognition is happening in real time — which would constitute a breach of newly implemented AI rules — or whether the ways in which surveillance images are being processed gives Hungary an opt-out. The AI Act foresees administrative fines of up to €35 million for violations, but it’s up to EU countries themselves to appoint an authority to impose a fine. Still, EU countries have to report back to the Commission if they allow some of the prohibited practices, which gives Brussels some power to intervene. Regnier said the Commission “will not hesitate to take action, where appropriate.” A Hungarian government spokesperson said Hungary “believes all is in line with our constitution and EU law.” GROWING PRESSURE The EU’s executive has been under heavy pressure to respond to Hungary’s Pride ban, particularly on the use of facial recognition. The EU moved in February to prohibit police forces from using real-time facial recognition technology under its artificial intelligence rulebook. Whether to ban systems that can identify people in real time based on their biometric data (i.e. through CCTV) was one of the thorniest topics as the law was being agreed — European Parliament lawmakers largely favored a ban while EU countries wanted an opt-out to allow them to fight serious crime. As a result, “real-time biometric identification” by police forces is forbidden, but with significant exceptions.  The EU’s executive has been under heavy pressure to respond to Hungary’s Pride ban, particularly on the use of facial recognition. | Balint Szentgallay/NurPhoto via Getty Images “Hungary’s amended law appears to enable the use of real-time biometric surveillance at Pride events, which is an application clearly falling under the AI Act’s prohibitions,” said Italian social democratic European lawmaker Brando Benifei, one of the two architects of the EU’s AI Act. “Such systems are not only technically designed to identify individuals in public without consent, but also risk inferring sensitive attributes like sexual orientation,” he said in a statement shared with POLITICO.  Two dozen civil society groups expressed their concerns about Hungary’s move in a letter to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week. On April 14, the Commission’s Executive Vice President for Tech Sovereignty Henna Virkkunen met with the new Hungarian government commissioner for AI, László Palkovics. Commission spokespeople didn’t say whether Virkkunen had raised the issue with Palkovics. Palkovics served as an independent tech and innovation minister in previous Orbán governments. He was appointed in late February and will be in charge of setting up the Hungarian authority that will oversee enforcement of the AI Act.  A MATTER OF SECONDS Hungary can avoid an AI Act ban if facial-recognition technology is not used in real time but has a time lag — which, although not forbidden, is considered a “high-risk” application. That could well be the case, said Ádám Remport, a legal expert at the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, which campaigns in favor of human rights and opposes the government’s plan.  According to Remport, the Hungarian police take footage from public cameras and send it to the Hungarian Institute for Forensic Sciences, which does the actual facial recognition. “Because there’s a time lag here, it may not be real time according to the AI Act, but we don’t know what that time lag is,” he said.  Even if there’s a time lag, Hungary will still have to adhere to “strict regulatory requirements,” said the Commission’s Regnier, such as conducting an impact assessment. That would also require the Hungarian government to seek approval from a judge — but Brussels and Budapest are engaged in an ongoing tug-of-war over the independence of judges and the country’s adherence to the rule of law. For campaigners, it’s proof that the EU’s AI regulation has too many loopholes that allow police forces to use facial-recognition technology.  “We are now seeing the concrete consequences of what happens when we succeed in watering down certain regulations,” Remport said.

BRUSSELS—The European Union is banning some “unacceptable” uses of artificial intelligence from Feb. 2, setting a world first for curbs on the nascent technology. But critics say the bans have too many loopholes that allow European police and migration authorities to use AI — including technology that can quickly identify faces on security cameras — to help track perpetrators of serious crimes, such as terror attacks. The European Union’s AI Act no longer allows AI to be used to profile whether someone will commit a crime, with such “predictive policing” one of seven categories of AI use now banned. Scraping images from the internet to build up a database for facial recognition or deducting a person’s emotions from biometric data is also prohibited. While the bans enter into force this Sunday, governments still have until August to nominate the authorities that will enforce them. The AI Act is a world-first in setting rules for how the new technology can be used. The European Commission’s tech boss Henna Virkkunen lauded the bill last year as one that will “protect our citizens” while also being an “enabler for innovation.” Creating safeguards for the nascent technology is viewed as essential to enable widespread use. Other parts of the law will be rolled out gradually over the next year and a half. The rules set the EU apart from other parts of the world where there are few similar rules to govern the technology, underlining its position at the regulatory vanguard. U.S. President Donald Trump took the opposite tack by ripping up an executive order on AI safety from his predecessor, President Joe Biden. Brando Benifei, an Italian lawmaker who helped to negotiate the rules, said the bans aim to avoid that AI could be used for “societal control” or the “compression of our freedoms.”  “The bans are very much concentrated on one area of concern, which is linked to the protection of our democracies,” he said. Enforcing them could be messy. European police and migration authorities are also using several AI practices, like real-time facial recognition in public spaces, and were able to secure long lists of exemptions in the rulebook to continue doing so. Academics and activists are concerned and watching closely how the law will be applied. “You can even question whether you can really speak of a prohibition if there [are] so many exceptions,” said Nathalie Smuha, an assistant professor and researcher in AI ethics at KU Leuven university.  HOLLYWOOD OR CHINA A total ban on some AI uses wasn’t on the cards when the European Commission instructed its experts to prepare an AI strategy in 2018. Experts and top officials quickly changed their minds, said Smuha, who coordinated the expert group’s work, as they realized that existing legislation might fall short of tackling certain practices. Brando Benifei, an Italian lawmaker who helped to negotiate the rules, said the bans aim to avoid that AI could be used for “societal control” or the “compression of our freedoms.” | Wael Hamzeh/EPA-EFE The Commission’s first draft for the new AI rules in April 2021 already suggested prohibiting several practices, such as those that “distort a person’s behavior” via subliminal techniques or exploit vulnerable groups.  When the bill went to the European Parliament for discussion, lawmakers added to that list as they negotiated with government officials. The final shape of the law was agreed in December 2023.  Kim Van Sparrentak, a Dutch Greens lawmaker involved in the AI Act negotiations, said the list’s bans fell into three categories. “Things that were already existing that we knew we didn’t want, [and] things that we could imagine either from Hollywood movies to some extent or from China,” she said. One case that influenced the drafting was a furor in the Netherlands in 2019 over Dutch tax authorities using an algorithm to spot childcare benefits fraud, a move which led to some 26,000 people being wrongly accused of fraud. The European Commission’s tech boss Henna Virkkunen lauded the bill last year as one that will “protect our citizens” while also being an “enabler for innovation.” | Ronald Wittek/EPA-EFE Such a practice could now be banned, falling under predictive policing.  “If you want a society that is based on the rule of law, you can’t treat people constantly like they are already potential criminals,” Van Sparrentak said.  Similarly, the ban on scraping pictures of people’s faces from the Internet stems from U.S.-based Clearview AI, a facial recognition firm investigated for pulling billions of images into its database. The AI Act forbids the use of “AI systems that create or expand facial recognition databases through the untargeted scraping of facial images from the Internet. ”  China may have inspired some other bans, such as a prohibition on social scoring, such as the Chinese system of ranking individuals based on their behavior. MIGRATION Digital rights campaigners pointed to the law’s “various grave loopholes,” particularly for policing and migration, a group of 22 organizations wrote in an open letter in January. “The most glaring loophole is the fact that the bans do not apply to law enforcement and migrational authorities,” said Caterina Rodelli, EU policy analyst at digital rights group Access Now.  The ban on scraping pictures of people’s faces from the Internet stems from U.S.-based Clearview AI, a facial recognition firm investigated for pulling billions of images into its database. | Leon Neal/Getty Images An eye-catching exemption is the ban for real-time facial recognition in public places. In principle, law enforcers won’t be able to do that anymore, but EU countries can still allow exceptions, especially for the most serious crimes. AI also can’t be used to detect emotions at schools or offices, but that doesn’t apply apply for law enforcement and migration. Activists have warned this could allow the use of AI lie detectors, that scan a face for any signs of deceit, at the borders Van Sparrentak said these sorts of exemptions were a red line for EU governments during negotiation, forcing last-ditch talks to stretch to 36 hours. “They want to be able to use all the tools at their disposal,” she said.