Universitatea Ecologica din Bucuresti

Universitatea Ecologica din Bucuresti Universitatea Ecologică din București prima instituție particulară de învățământ superior din România

Universitatea Ecologicã din Bucuresti, prima institutie particularã de învatamânt superior din Romanîa, fondatã la 4 aprilie 1990 sub egida Societatii "Ateneul Roman", a fost acreditatã institutional prin Legea nr. 282 din 26 iunie 2003.

30/09/2026

Barometrul dreptului inteligenței artificiale/super inteligenței și al tehnologiilor cuantice

– Cuvânt de deschidere la Conferința națională de DIA/DSI – 30 septembrie 2026 –

Prof. univ. dr. Mircea Duțu
Director emerit al Institutului de Cercetări Juridice
al Academiei Române
Președintele Universității Ecologice din București

Cea de-a doua ediție a Conferinței Naționale de Dreptul Inteligenței Artificiale/Super Inteligenței (CN–DIA/SI), inițiată de Universitatea Ecologică din București (UEB) și organizată în parteneriat cu Universitatea Națională de Știință și Tehnologie „Politehnica” din București și Grupul editorial „Universul Juridic”, prin mesajul transmis, contextul de desfășurare și tematica abordată confirmă o tendință majoră de dezvoltare a dreptului, consolidează o nouă linie de gândire juridică și marchează noi repere ale evoluțiilor în materie.
Într-adevăr, reuniunea de profil a devenit și își propune să continue a fi barometrul de exprimare a conținutului și radarul evoluțiilor reglementare și doctrinale în materia dreptului inteligenței artificiale/super inteligenței și de acum și în cea a dreptului cuanticului.

1. Fără îndoială, o atare manifestare științifică, prin chiar agenda sa, atestă faptul că dreptul IA a intrat deja, sub impulsul dezvoltării accelerate a tehnologiei pe care o reglementează, într-o fază de tranziție crucială, trecând, după „șocul” apariției IA generative în 2022, de la o fază de reflecție teoretică la o eră de reglementare concretă și de aplicare efectivă. În același timp, perspectiva IA generală și cuantică anunță ipostaza sa anticipativă. La nivel mondial și european timpul discuțiilor prospective a cedat locul normelor tangibile adecvate și operative. AI Act (din 2024) cunoaște deja ajustări prin Digital Omnibus on AI (2026) și se află în plin proces de punere în aplicare. Astăzi, în peste 60 de state s-au adoptat legi și/sau alte reglementări naționale în materie și tendința e de sporire a numărului lor. Asistăm apoi la trecerea de la dreptul în vigoare, general spre unul special, novator și revoluționar. Pentru o vreme, juriștii au trebuit să aplice, mai mult sau mai puțin forțat, prin interpretări adesea puternic creatoare, reglementările preexistente (cu precădere cele referitoare la protecția datelor personale, dreptul de autor, răspunderea civilă) la sistemele automatizate. Astăzi, un corpus de drept specific inteligenței artificiale se structurează spre a acoperi vidul juridic, a favoriza inovația și a proteja drepturile fundamentale. Asemenea evoluții inovatoare generează desigur și provocări operaționale; deopotrivă, regulatorii și instanțele judiciare întâmpină și trebuie să facă față unor noi dificultăți tehnice și juridice ținând, mai ales de transparența datelor de antrenament a modelelor, de respectarea dreptului de autor și de atribuirea responsabilităților în caz de prejudiciu ce implică noua tehnologie.
Recentele dezvoltări diplomatice din septembrie 2026 – marcate de audierile în cadrul Consiliului de Securitate al ONU asupra controlului și securității IA, dezbaterile din cadrul Adunării Generale a Națiunilor Unite pe aceeași temă și noul summit de la Washington D. Trump-Xi Jiping – redesenează contururi politice și juridice majore ale problematicii, caracterizate printr-un clivaj evident între căutarea standardelor mondiale și refuzul celor două superputeri de a accepta o reglementare globală și o coordonare universală.
Poziționările înregistrate și dezbaterile aferente au relevat necesitatea adaptării dreptului internațional la riscurile existențiale legate de pierderea controlului uman asupra modelelor de frontieră (frontier models). Înainte de toate, se degajă consolidarea emergenței unui consens asupra obligației unui control uman sistematic în luarea deciziilor cu efecte letale. Din punct de vedere juridic aceasta presupune o interpretare mai strictă a dreptului internațional umanitar spre a interzice autonomia completă a sistemelor de a**e letale (SALA). Contrar dorințelor a numeroase state – precum cele semnatare ale declarației din septembrie – SUA au respins formal instituirea unui regulator mondial al IA (comparabil cu AIEA pentru nuclear). Este, poate, semnul că în planul dreptului internațional public nu ne putem aștepta, în orizontul imediat, la încheierea unui acord internațional pertinent, dar sub presiunea realităților lucrurile se pot schimba.
Nu în ultimul rând, depozițiile din fața Consiliului de Securitate al ONU ale conducătorilor tech (precum Sam Altman de la OpenAI și Dario Amodei de la Anthropic), primii actori ai domeniului și inedite subiecte de drept, în care se face apel la garanții internaționale, consolidează noțiunea juridică aplicabilă specific în domeniu de îndatorire de diligență (due diligence). În caz de incident transfrontalier major, aceste declarații ar putea servi ca fundament pentru angajarea răspunderii editorilor de modele.
Last, but not least, summitul bilateral americano-chinez s-a soldat cu o lipsă de acord de încadrare substanțială a IA, cele două superblocuri tehnologice refuzând restricționarea cursei lor aferentă „superinteligenței”. Cu toate acestea, putem afirma că cel puțin s-a instaurat un „embrion” al „dreptului crizei IA” Într-adevăr, principalul rezultat juridic tangibil este un acord vizând stabilirea unui dialog permanent și instituirea în acest sens, după modelul străveziu al „telefonului roșu” nuclear, a unui canal de comunicare specific pentru incidentele IA și gestiunea crizelor militare aferente. Ca practică internațională demersul se înscrie tradiției coexistenței pașnice aferente „războiului rece” postbelic, creându-se astfel o obligație de transparență reciprocă în caz de comportament anormal și periculos al unei IA suverane (de exemplu, atacuri cibernetice neintenționate ori mișcarea modelelor autonome). Se anunță astfel o nouă eră, prin excelență tehnologică, a „distrugerii reciproc asigurată” („mutual assured destruction”), de această dată dintr-o dublă perspectivă: cea a confruntărilor, pe de o parte, în plan uman/artificial, iar pe de alta, în cel geostrategic între marii actori tehnologici, ceea ce înseamnă iarăși, dar în alți termeni, neproliferare și descurajare.
Nu putem să nu înregistrăm, și aceasta din păcate, nici divergența conceptuală fundamentală și statu-quoul reglementar. Astfel, Președintele Trump a reafirmat dorința sa de a menține un statu-quo reglementar strict, clamând suficiența dreptului existent și rolul determinant al intervenției administrative sub pretextul neobstaculării competiției tehnologice cu rivalul său geopolitic. În același registru, Administrația federală americană a oficializat, prin decret prezidențial din 29 septembrie a.c., sintagma de super inteligență, și prin „acordul constrângător în plan moral” semnat la aceeași dată de Președintele Trump cu patronii a 6 firme tech s-a impus ca „sens al codificării” autoregularea domeniului prin „cele mai bune norme și practici” și instituirea unui control intern robust, la patru niveluri”. La rândul său, Președintele Xi a insistat asupra principiului dezvoltării tehnologiei „pentru binele comun” și a rămânerii sale „sub controlul uman”. Absența de consens blochează, cel puțin pentru moment, emergența unei armonizări juridice americano-chineze, amânând-o doar. În absența de reguli de securitate comune, dreptul aplicabil IA între cele două superputeri rămâne dictat de dreptul vamal, restricțiile privind cipurile electronice de vârf (export controls) și dreptul de proprietate intelectuală.
În orice caz, putem afirma pe drept cuvânt că astfel și acum IA a devenit o preocupare mondială și o veritabilă problemă de drept internațional.

2. Sub impulsul rapidelor evoluții tehnologice și a trepidațiilor juridico-academice aferente, conferința noastră este cadrul cel mai potrivit și pentru a marca noi dezvoltări universitare în materie. Astfel, am apreciat că, pe măsură ce calculul cuantic se îndreaptă spre implementarea practică, iar sistemele de IA își generalizează prezența în societate, se impune a face loc în programele noastre de studiu universitar unui nou drept: Dreptul tehnologiilor cuantice (Quantum Law). În acest fel UEB devine prima universitate din România și printre puținele din Europa care introduce o atare inedită disciplină științifică. Deocamdată, din rațiuni evidente și în așteptarea adoptării de către UE a Quantum Act (amânată pentru semestrul IV 2027), și pentru început, prezența sa se va manifesta prin includerea în anul universitar 2026–2027 a masterului de DIA a două noi materii: Introducere în dreptul tehnologiilor cuantice (Quantum Law) și, respectiv, Dreptul inteligenței artificiale cuantice. În același timp, cercetarea științifică se va deschide complementar și în context de stimulare reciprocă, spre analiza modului în care sistemele juridice trebuie să conceptualizeze, să reglementeze și să răspundă practic, prompt și eficient, în mod separat și conjugat inteligenței artificiale și celei de-a doua revoluții cuantice.

3. Tema actualei ediții a CN–DIA privește Receptarea dreptului european al inteligenței artificiale în dreptul român. Spre o lege națională privind IA? Justificarea alegerii sale ține deopotrivă de planul evoluțiilor reglementare și de cel al dezvoltărilor teoretice. Desigur, din punct de vedere strict formal sintagma din titlu, „dreptul european”, arată faptul că se au în vedere cele două componente principale ale cadrului continental: reglementarea unional-europeană (centrată pe AI Act) și, respectiv, cea aferentă Consiliului Europei (constituită în special din Convenția-cadru privind IA și drepturile omului, democrația și statul de drept, din 2024). Opțiunea de a aborda receptarea națională și perspectiva adecvării sale în context intern s-a impus mai ales ca urmare a modificării RIA prin Digital Omnibus on AI [Regulamentul (UE) nr. 2026/1744] a reglementării-cadru europene. Experiența statelor membre ale UE a arătat deja că specificul domeniului și complexitatea problematicii impun adaptări importante ale regulamentului unional-european în context național, în pofida operabilității sale directe, în vederea instituirii guvernanței, desemnării autorităților de control și fixării sancțiunilor cerute și a altor aspecte concrete, impuse de condiționalitățile locale. O reglementare națională cadru, bine gândită, temeinic elaborată juridic și consecvent aplicată poate contribui la suplinirea absenței anumitor elemente structurale ori capacități organizatorice depline, la a atenua retardul tehnologic și la a favoriza avansuri semnificative în domeniu.

4. În privința ultimelor dezvoltări reglementare în materie, cu un rol de simplificare administrativă și de reajustare temporală a DIA unional-european, Digital Omnibus on AI a reașezat termene, a ușurat sarcinile administrative, a întărit anumite interdicții și a promovat armonizarea sectorială, în sensul ajustării articulării AI Act cu alte reglementări europene pertinente existente. El a exprimat voința Uniunii de a adapta ritmul încadrării sale digitale la realitățile operaționale ale pieței și, nu în ultimul rând, a însemnat o pliere a blocului comunitar la presiunile conjuncturale ale contextului global. În același orizont de încercări ale dispozitivului său normativ, trebuie citită și măsura amânării elaborării, prezentării și adoptării Quantum Act (prevăzute inițial pentru al doilea trimestru al anului 2026 și reportate pentru ultimul din anul viitor).
Propus spre a răspunde provocărilor punerii în aplicare a AI Act, regulamentul modificator reamenajează cadrul preexistent, marcând o etapă crucială de recalibrare, de simplificare administrativă și de adaptare realistă a dreptului european al IA la cerințele pieței și la realitățile confruntărilor geostrategice.
Evoluțiile reglementare naționale, europene și internaționale, apariția reperelor unei guvernanțe globale și provocările permanente crescânde și tot mai decisive ale tehnologiei ne arată că DIA se constituie într-o componentă tot mai consistentă a dreptului pozitiv existent. În sens conceptual, de la un ansamblu de reguli transversale și sectoriale rezultate din dreptul în vigoare și îmbogățite prin texte de pionierat precum AI Act european, el se îndreaptă rapid, prin intermediul legilor naționale generale (cadru) în materie, normative, standarde și alte texte relevante spre un domeniu specific unic și unificat al dreptului, purtând mai puțin povara încadrării normative tradiționale, cât mai ales marca a ceea ce o să vină prin ofensiva noului drept.
Din punct de vedere teoretic, IA/SI aduce o veritabilă provocare conceptuală; ea busculează categoriile tradiționale ale dreptului, precum noțiunile esențiale de subiect de drept/personalitate juridică, bunuri sau de răspundere. Renovarea metodelor face așa încât știința juridică să integreze „justiția predictivă” și analiza datelor masive (legal tech), punând astfel în discuție rolul judecătorului și interpretarea normelor.
În privința mutației interdisciplinare, juristul nu mai poate gândi regula în mod izolat în arealul său legislativ, ci trebuie să colaboreze cu informatica, etica și ingineria spre a înțelege impactul concret al tehnologiei și a oferi remediile normative necesare.
Alături și împreună cu asemenea evoluții se afirmă un nou model hibrid de reglementare, la mijlocul drumului între hard law și soft law, capabil să evolueze la fel de repede precum inovația tehnologică și în consens cu noile date ale realității sociale.
Odată cu această ediție a conferinței și cu noul an universitar 2026–2027, prin aceeași contribuție a UEB dreptul cuanticului, o altă tehnologie revoluționară, de ruptură, își face intrarea în cadrul dezbaterilor științifice și al studiului universitar.
Sunt tot atâtea argumente și expresii concrete care certifică definitiv existența DIA/DSI și anunță apariția dreptului cuantic, în perspectiva unei noi ecuații și armonii între tehnologie, societate și drept.
Iar rolul de barometru prompt și competent al conferințelor naționale anuale de profil în perceperea progresului tehnologico-juridic este evident și de neînlocuit.
Cu aceste gânduri și într-un atare sens reuniunea de față se înscrie pe agenda preocupărilor prioritare ale prezentului universitar, științific și de interes public major.


Barometer of Artificial Intelligence / Superintelligence and Quantum Technologies Law

- Opening Remarks at the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence / Superintelligence Law - 30 September 2026 -

Prof. univ. dr. Mircea Duțu
Director Emeritus of the Legal Research Institute of the Romanian Academy
President of the Ecological University of Bucharest

The second edition of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence / Superintelligence Law (CN-DIA/SI), initiated by the Ecological University of Bucharest (UEB) and organized in partnership with the “Politehnica” National University of Science and Technology in Bucharest and the “Universul Juridic” Publishing Group, through its message, the context in which it took place, and the topics addressed, confirms a major trend in the development of the law, consolidates a new line of legal thinking, and sets new benchmarks for developments in this field.
Indeed, this specialized event has become, and aims to continue to be, the barometer for expressing the substance of, and the radar for tracking, regulatory and doctrinal developments in the field of artificial intelligence/superintelligence law, and from now on, in the field of quantum law as well.

1. Undoubtedly, such a scientific conference, by its very agenda, confirms that AI law has already entered, driven by the rapid development of the technology it regulates, a crucial transitional phase, going from a phase of theoretical reflection to an era of concrete regulation and effective implementation, following the “shock” of the emergence of generative AI in 2022. At the same time, the prospect of general and quantum AI announces its anticipatory nature. At global and European levels, the time for prospective discussions has given way to concrete, appropriate, and effective rules. AI Act (of 2024) has already been amended by Digital Omnibus on AI (2026) and is currently being implemented. Today, more than 60 countries have enacted laws and/or other national regulations in this field, and the trend is toward an increase in their number. Then we witness the transition from the general law currently in force to a special, innovative, and revolutionary law. The legal practitioners had to apply for a while, more or less by necessity and through often highly creative interpretations, the pre-existing regulations (especially those concerning personal data protection, copyright, civil liability) to automated systems. Today, a body of law specific to artificial intelligence is taking shape to fill the legal void, promote innovation, and protect fundamental rights. Such innovative developments naturally give rise to operational challenges; at the same time, legislators and courts are facing and must address new technical and legal difficulties, particularly regarding the transparency of model training data, compliance with copyright law, and the allocation of responsibilities in case of damage involving the new technology.
Recent diplomatic developments in September 2026 - marked by hearings at the UN Security Council on AI control and security, debates at the United Nations General Assembly on the same topic, and the newly convened summit in Washington D. Trump-Xi Jiping - are reshaping the major political and legal outlines of the issue, characterized by a clear divide between the pursuit of global standards and the refusal of the two superpowers to accept global regulation and universal coordination.
The positions expressed and the related debates revealed the need to adapt international law to the existential risks associated with the loss of human control over frontier models. Above all, there is a growing consensus on the need for systematic human control in making decisions that have lethal consequences. From a legal standpoint, this implies a stricter interpretation of international humanitarian law in order to prohibit the complete autonomy of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS). Contrary to the wishes of many countries - such as the signatories to the September declaration - U.S.A. have formally rejected the establishment of a global AI regulator (comparable to the IAEA for nuclear energy). This may be a sign that, as far as public international law is concerned, we cannot expect a relevant international agreement to be concluded in the immediate future, but under the pressure of reality, things may change.
Last but not least, the statements made before the UN Security Council by tech leaders (such as Sam Altman, OpenAI, and Dario Amodei, Anthropic), key players in the field, and novel legal issues, in which international safeguards are invoked, reinforce the legal concept of due diligence as it applies specifically to this field. In the event of a major cross-border incident, these statements could serve as the basis for holding model publishers liable.
Last but not least, the U.S.-China bilateral summit ended with a failure to reach an agreement on the substantive regulation of AI, as the two technological superpowers refused to restrict their race toward “superintelligence”. Nevertheless, we can say that at least the “embryo” of “AI crisis law” has been planted. Indeed, the main tangible legal outcome is an agreement to establish a permanent dialogue and, to that end, to set up, following the ancient model of the nuclear “hotline,” a dedicated communication channel for AI incidents and the management of related military crises. As an international practice, this approach is part of the tradition of peaceful coexistence associated with the postwar “Cold War,” thereby creating an obligation of mutual transparency in case of abnormal and dangerous behavior by a sovereign AI (for example, unintentional cyberattacks or the movement of autonomous models). A new era is thus dawning, one defined by technological excellence, of “mutually assured destruction”, this time from a dual perspective: that of confrontations, on the one hand, between humans and machines, and, on the other, from a geostrategic perspective among the major technological players, which again means, albeit in different terms, nonproliferation and deterrence.
Unfortunately, we cannot fail to notice the fundamental conceptual divergence and the regulatory status quo. Thus, President Trump reaffirmed his desire to maintain a strict regulatory status quo, asserting that existing law is sufficient and that administrative intervention plays a decisive role, under the pretext of not hindering technological competition with his geopolitical rival. In the same vein, the U.S. federal government formalized, by presidential decree dated 29 September of this year, the term “superintelligence,” and by the “morally binding agreement” signed on the same date by President Trump with the owners of six tech companies, it was agreed that the “purpose of the code” was to ensure self-regulation of the field through “best norms and practices” and the establishment of a robust, four-tiered internal control system”. In turn, President Xi emphasized the principle of developing technology “for the common good” and keeping it “under human control”. The absence of consensus is blocking, at least for the time being, the emergence of U.S.-China legal harmonization, only postponing it. In the absence of common security rules, the law governing AI between the two superpowers continues to be dictated by customs law, restrictions on advanced electronic chips (export controls), and intellectual property law.
In any case, we can rightly say that in this way and now, AI has become a global concern and a genuine issue of international law.

2. Driven by rapid technological advances and the associated legal and academic turmoil, our conference is the most appropriate framework for also highlighting new academic developments in this field. Thus, we have realized that, as quantum computing moves toward practical implementation and AI systems become increasingly widespread in society, it is necessary to make room in our university curricula for a new field of law: Quantum Law. In this way, UEB becomes the first university in Romania and one of the few in Europe to introduce such a novel academic discipline. For the time being, for obvious reasons and pending the EU’s adoption of the Quantum Act (postponed until Q4 2027), and as a first step, this will be reflected in the inclusion of two new courses in the “Artificial Intelligence Law” (DIA) master’s program for the 2026-2027 academic year: Introduction to Quantum Law and, respectively, Quantum Artificial Intelligence Law. At the same time, scientific research will also open up in a complementary and mutually encouraging context to analyze how legal systems must conceptualize, regulate, and respond practically, promptly, and effectively, both separately and in conjunction, to artificial intelligence and the second quantum revolution.

3. The topic of this edition of CN-DIA is Incorporation of European Law on Artificial Intelligence into Romanian Law. Toward a National Law on AI? This choice is justified by both the trajectory of regulatory developments and that of theoretical developments. Certainly, from a strictly formal standpoint, the phrase “European law” in the title indicates that the two main components of the continental framework are being considered: European Union regulatory framework (centered on the AI Act) and, respectively, that of the Council of Europe (consisting primarily of the 2024 Framework Convention on AI and Human Rights, Democracy, and the Rule of Law). The decision to address the inclusion in national law and its adaptation to the domestic context resulted mainly from the amendment to the RIA brought about by the Digital Omnibus on AI [Regulation (EU) No. 2026/1744] to the European framework regulation. The experience of EU member States has already shown that the specific nature of the field and the complexity of the issues require significant adaptations of the EU regulation to the national context, despite its direct enforceability, in order to establish governance, designate supervisory authorities, and set the required sanctions and other specific aspects dictated by local conditions. A well-conceived, legally sound, and consistently enforced national framework regulation can help compensate for the absence of certain structural elements or fully developed organizational capacities, mitigate the technological gap, and foster significant progress in the field.

4. With regard to the latest regulatory developments in this field, which aim to simplify administrative procedures and readjust the timeline for the EU’s AI Act, the Digital Omnibus on AI has realigned deadlines, eased administrative burdens, strengthened certain prohibitions, and promoted sectoral harmonization, with a view to adapting the AI Act to other relevant existing European regulations. It expressed the EU’s willingness to adapt the pace of its digital regulation to the operational realities of the market and, last but not least, represented a concession by EU countries to the circumstantial pressures of the global context. The decision to postpone the drafting, presentation, and adoption of the Quantum Act (originally scheduled for the second quarter of 2026 and rescheduled for the last quarter of next year) should also be viewed within the same context of testing its regulatory framework.
Recommended to address the challenges of implementing the AI Act, the amending regulation restructures the existing framework, marking a crucial step toward recalibration, administrative simplification, and the realistic adaptation of European AI law to the requirements of the market and the realities of geostrategic challenges.
National, European, and international regulatory developments, the emergence of the benchmarks for global governance, and the constantly growing and increasingly decisive challenges posed by technology show us that DIA is becoming an increasingly significant component of the existing positive law. Conceptually, starting from a set of cross-cutting and sector-specific rules derived from the existing law and enriched by pioneering texts such as the European AI Act, it is rapidly moving, through general (framework) national laws on the subject, regulations, standards, and other relevant texts, toward a specifically unique and unified field of law, bearing less of the burden of traditional regulatory frameworks and more, above all, the mark of what is to come through the emergence of this new law.
Theoretically, AI/SI brings a genuine conceptual challenge; it disrupts traditional legal categories, such as the essential concepts of legal subject/legal personality, property, and liability. Renewing methods enables legal science to incorporate “predictive justice” and big data analysis (legal tech), thereby calling into question the role of the judge and the interpretation of legal norms.
With regard to interdisciplinary change, legal professional can no longer consider the rule in isolation within its legislative context, but must collaborate with computer science, ethics, and engineering to understand the true impact of technology and provide the necessary regulatory remedies.
Alongside and in tandem with such developments, a new hybrid regulatory model is emerging, halfway between “hard law” and “soft law,” capable of evolving as quickly as technological innovation and in line with the new realities of society.
With this edition of the conference and the start of the 2026-2027 academic year, thanks to UEB’s ongoing contribution to quantum law, another revolutionary, groundbreaking technology is making its way into scientific debates and academic study.
There are just as many arguments and concrete examples that definitively confirm the existence of DIA/DSI and announce the emergence of quantum law, with a view toward a new balance and harmony between technology, society, and law.
Furthermore, the role of these annual national conferences as a timely and competent barometer in assessing technological and legal progress is evident and irreplaceable.
With these thoughts in mind, and in this spirit, this meeting is part of the agenda of priority concerns in the areas of academia, science, and matters of major public interest.

23/09/2026

Deschiderea anului universitar 2026-2027

Deschiderea festivă a anului universitar 2026-2027 va avea loc în ziua de joi, 1 octombrie 2026, la orele 10.00, în Aula Magna a Universității Ecologice din București (Bulevardul Doina Cornea, nr. 1G, Sectorul 6, București).

12/08/2026

Mircea Duțu: Along with AI Law, Quantum Law has a decisive impact on contemporary legal progress

By launching two new courses beginning in the 2026-2027 academic year, namely Introduction to Quantum Law and Quantum Artificial Intelligence Law, as part of the “Artificial Intelligence Law” (DIA) master’s program, Ecological University of Bucharest (UEB) is paving the way, in Romania as well, for academic study and legal research in Quantum Law (the law of quantum or of quantum technologies - DTC). According to the official announcement, this step was taken in preparation for a new specialized master’s program to be organized and dedicated to Quantum Law, in anticipation of the European Union’s adoption of the Quantum Act (expected in early 2027), and in view of the need to carry out the official accreditation procedures for this new field of study. This new pioneering academic initiative establishes the Faculty of Law at UEB as a true center for disseminating knowledge and providing training in the law related to emerging technologies, which are part of the fourth scientific and technological revolution that will shape the legal framework of tomorrow’s world.
For a professional and insightful introduction to the topic, we spoke with Mircea Duțu, Professor Ph. D. h. c., Director Emeritus of the Legal Research Institute of the Romanian Academy and President of UEB, the initiator of the project and the founder of AI law in Romania.

Ovidiu Predescu – I propose that we begin our discussion by providing a more precise description of this pioneering educational initiative, which focuses on the legal aspect of the latest technological progress represented by quantum technologies. We are, therefore, witnessing a completely new development in the Romanian academic landscape, but what is the situation in other countries from this perspective?

Mircea Duțu – Legal concerns related to quantum phenomena are everywhere in their early stages. Like in our country, there is still no master’s degree specifically dedicated to this field, but several leading universities are incorporating this specialization through research departments of excellence, master’s programs in digital law, or interdisciplinary laboratories. The Netherlands is considered the academic leader in this field, and its University of Amsterdam is regarded as the most advanced, thanks to the research group known as Law and Governance of Quantum Technologies, part of the IVIR Institute. It trains students in the field of quantum governance, cybersecurity, and related intellectual property matters.
In France, a department at the University Institute of University of Burgundy Europe (Dijon) is entirely dedicated to the legal framework of quantum technologies, University of Nice is promoting an interdisciplinary research project called Quant-SF, and Paris-Saclay University, through the QUANTUM group, encourages interdisciplinary bridges (such as the ARTEQ degree) that enable law and technical profiles to study the ethics and rules of the new technologies.
In the U.S., we can mention Stanford Law School as an example, with its Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum, which examines market laws, national security, human rights, and intellectual property applied to quantum technology.
Finally, University of Sherbrooke (Quebec), the cradle of the Canadian quantum ecosystem, is developing the interdisciplinary project Dialogue quantique (Quantum Dialogue); this program brings together the humanities and law in order to proactively anticipate the impact of quantum technologies on society before their widespread implementation.
It is not by chance that we chose the master’s program in Artificial Intelligence Law, which has been operating successfully at UEB’s Faculty of Law for several years, to be the pivotal program for initiating the study of Quantum Law at the university level in Romania, and taking into consideration both this cutting-edge teaching experience and the interconnections between the two fields of study and scientific research, as well as the prospects for future development. In addition, the specific topic will be included on the agenda of our University's Center for Transdisciplinary Research on Ecological and Digital Transition, thereby complementing the perspective of academic training with that of scientific research.

O. P. – Beyond this innovative academic endeavor, and as a prerequisite for it, representing a major doctrinal breakthrough, is your assertion that a law of quantum technologies is taking shape, and is developing at an accelerated pace. What would be the defining characteristics of such a legal concept?

M. D. – Situated at the intersection of digital law, cybersecurity law, and the field of strategic sovereignty, DTC refers to all the rules – whether soft or hard law – that govern the research, development, commercialization, and use of tools based on quantum physics, which mainly cover aspects related to cybersecurity, technological sovereignty, and intellectual property. The aim is to address scientific uncertainty, the risks of breaches in current encryption systems, and the access to highly strategic infrastructures. The main legal challenges in this field relate to: data security (quantum computing power threatens current secret codes, urging States to develop and adopt new post-quantum encryption rules), intellectual property (patents related to qubits, the physical components of superconductors, and quantum computing software pose unprecedented challenges in terms of legal assessment and protection) and geopolitics and defense (quantum technologies are subject to strict controls on exports and to policies on technological sovereignty, particularly in Europe among leading technology powers).
Its dynamics are part of the developments initiated in the mid-2010s, when we witnessed a sudden surge in awareness and growing concerns regarding the geopolitical and technological challenges associated with quantum technologies, which was marked by the adoption of national quantum strategies and similar concerns at the EU level. Starting in 2016, the latter laid the foundation for regional coordination with the launch of Quantum Manifesto, followed in 2018 by Quantum Flagship, which aims to bring together research and innovation efforts in this field. Such developments have led to the adoption, in July 2025, of the Quantum Europe Strategy, which has multiple objectives but two defining dimensions: strategic autonomy and industrial leadership. Legislation on data protection, cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence, along with the organization of its own strategic objectives in the quantum field, have influenced and driven increased efforts to create a tailored regulatory framework, particularly through the future Quantum Act, scheduled for 2026. This text, which draws inspiration from legislative acts in other technological fields, such as the AI Act, will define technical rules, security standards, and market access rules, while also regulating the risks associated with the dual use of quantum technologies (civil and military).
Of course, the adoption of such a regulation, which would serve as a framework legislative act (the European Quantum Act), would mark the definitive, indisputable establishment of the law governing quantum technologies, alongside and complementary to the law governing artificial intelligence, within a predominantly European context and in line with the logic of an economic, technological and regulatory block (legal model). At the same time, at the international level, OECD Recommendation on Quantum Technologies of 28 May 2026 targets the benchmarks for the rapid development of computing, communications, and new quantum technologies.
These two laws – DIA and DTC – go beyond the general context of new technologies and are among those that transform society and bring about a change in the legal paradigm.

O.P. – From this structuring perspective, what would be the first theoretical priority pertaining to this novel field of regulation and legal reflection?
M. D. – Clearly, this involves the necessary development of doctrinal approaches related to this new field of legal knowledge. In fact, in some countries, research of this kind has emerged and is being conducted within special research structures such as academic departments, relevant projects, think tanks, and so on. In any case, the crystallization of an ethical and legal framework for quantum technologies is required as a preliminary step toward the future legal discipline and specific regulatory sequences. Specifically, on the one hand, it is necessary to conduct research, using various legal techniques such as dynamic interpretation and interdisciplinary analysis, to understand the existing law in relation to the new requirements of quantum technological and social realities.
Therefore, it is necessary to assess the capacity of current legal models to efficiently integrate and express the issues surrounding the risks posed by the emergence and development of quantum technology. By analogy with regulatory and doctrinal developments in the AI field, important milestones for this initiative can already be determined, especially since quantum computers and other such tools will largely be hybrid with AI systems. A major aspect of the issue will be the reaction of the major legal and ethical principles that already exist, such as equality, non-discrimination, transparency, and good governance. On the other hand, and based on the conclusions drawn, the next step is to identify gaps and offer proposals to supplement the relevant regulatory framework with other appropriate legal measures and regulations. And both of these complementary theoretical aspects can prefigure the new legal equation.

O. P. – With this methodological and conceptual introduction, let us continue, Professor, our dialogue by focusing on a recent development in the law, in response to the challenges posed by a cutting-edge technology, namely quantum technology (based on a new computing method that will fundamentally change our existence and our understanding of the universe), with a simple, direct question: why now, and in this way, are two legal disciplines being presented in a preview of an exceptional master’s program?

M. D. – In the context of new technologies, the quantum technologies in turn open up the prospect of a genuine industrial, medical, and security revolution through their ability to solve complex problems that have so far been impossible to address using so-called classical information technology. Its strengths, which lie in its exponential computing power (quantum computing), unbreakable security (cryptography and communications), and external measurement precision (quantum sensors) are shaping, alongside and in conjunction with other emerging technologies, led by artificial intelligence, the technological, scientific, and civilizational future of humanity. And like any major advance, the social response to the challenges generated necessarily involves the legal response as well, within the same equation of profound, transformative rupture. And just as the second quantum revolution is intertwined with the artificial intelligence revolution, the development strategies and related regulations are taking shape in a similar way and, furthermore, require regulatory design and academic study from a perspective of interdependencies and mutual intersections. Therefore, given the advance of the artificial intelligence's societal and regulatory response (primarily at the European Union level) after the establishment of Artificial Intelligence Law (DIA), the Quantum Technology Law (DTC) or Quantum Law is also beginning to take shape.
Indeed, even though DTC does not yet exist as an autonomous branch of the legal system and a specific field of academic study and scientific research, but rather as an indirect, fragmented, and work-in-progress legal framework, the EU’s proposed Quantum Act (European Quantum Technologies Act) and the reality of technological developments are accelerating the process of structuring it, following the model adopted by DIA a few years ago.
As a pioneer in this field, understanding the imperatives of legal progress and keeping pace with European regulations, the Ecological University of Bucharest is taking an important academic step in this direction during the 2026–2027 academic year. Thus, in preparation for the anticipated master's program in DTC, pending the adoption of Quantum Act and the completion of procedural formalities, we have added two courses, a preparatory course - Introduction to Quantum Technology Law - and an interdisciplinary course - Quantum Artificial Intelligence Law - to the existing DIA master's program starting in the 2024-2025 academic year. A relatively rapid development, yet one that reflects the pace and scale of the impact of new technologies, which will soon achieve its own profile.

O. P. – The launch of the proposed DTC master’s program includes, as a required component, the quantum artificial intelligence law, a pioneering interdisciplinary subfield that is, in itself, an academic novelty. What exactly is this about, specifically in its regard?

M. D. – Between these two complex, multidimensional, and emerging legal disciplines, there are elements of continuity, overlap, and complementarity, both in terms of specific regulation (particularly at EU level) and in terms of academic study itself. From this perspective, quantum artificial intelligence (QAI) which technically combines the computational capabilities of quantum computers with machine learning algorithms, is an emerging and interdisciplinary field of research, as is the future quantum internet, which will have a decisive impact on all technical and scientific progress, as well as on the legal framework governing new technologies. Such synergy could revolutionize key sectors such as medicine (discovery of new drugs), logistics (optimization of supply chains), or finances (modeling of risks). At the same time, it highlights sensitive issues related to transparency, (legal) accountability, and security. There is already concern that future quantum algorithms will be so complex that it will become difficult, if not impossible, to explain their processes and, therefore, their decisions. One of the first lines of thought in this field, which adds to the arguments in favour of introducing a new course into the DIA master’s program, is based on the AI Act’s acquis, which classifies artificial intelligence systems (AIS) by their level of risk, combining this approach with a complementary classification of AI models. At the same time, RIA, which was designed before the rise of classical quantum hybrid algorithms, does not explicitly address the specific nature of QAI. In addition, AI Act does not apply to a certain number of sectors, such as defense and research.
The solution for the technical method that would also have implications in the field of university studies could consist precisely in extending transparency requirements to QAI systems by creating complementary certifications that confirm the resilience of algorithms in the face of biases or cyberattacks. This is all the more true given that classical checking tools cannot, for the time being, be directly applied to quantum models.
Thus, as an interdisciplinary field, DIAC captures and articulates, on the one hand, the legal and technological characteristics of AI’s emergence in the quantum field and, on the other hand, those of the latter’s involvement in the AI field.

O. P. – An important aspect of this issue is, of course, both as a subject of study and as a professional challenge, the impact of quantum technologies on the legal professions. Thanks to its particularities and, although we are still in the early stages of this plan, and in certain respects, preparations for its adaptation are already necessary, so the relevance of these academic initiatives is increasing considerably. So, what are the expectations from this perspective?

M. D. – It is a topic that concerns us in proportion to its importance and that will be a priority on the agenda when drafting the curriculum for the new specialized master’s program. It has become an inherent requirement of academic training, regardless of the field of study, to take into account the latest technological developments; for this reason, a special course will address the impact of quantum technologies on the legal professions, in close connection with the impact of AI and in a unified perspective covering the various aspects of these new technologies.
Considering the substance of the issue, it is clear that such technologies will first and foremost disrupt the security of legal data, transform the analysis of evidence, and at the same time give rise to new and complex legal disputes that magistrates (judges and prosecutors), attorneys, and court clerks will need to master appropriately. Unlike artificial intelligence, which optimizes the existing tasks, quantum technology redefines the very infrastructure of the digital truth and the related technical accountability.
From this transformative perspective, it is acknowledged that the impact of the “quantum revolution” takes shape in the field around four major axes.
The first is the so-called “confidentiality crisis” and the obligation to migrate (cybersecurity), and it concerns the threat to professional secrecy (since quantum computers are capable of “breaking” current encryption algorithms - RSA, ECC - thereby calling into question the absolute confidentiality of messages exchanged between lawyers and their clients, as well as sensitive court data). Then there are the risks of “Harvest now, decrypt later” (meaning that cybercriminals are storing encrypted legal data today, expecting to be able to access it later thanks to quantum computers), which requires acquiring new expertise (namely, lawyers and court clerks must plan now for the transition to post-quantum cryptography - PQC - and if they fail to do so, the law firms to which they belong could face professional liability for gross negligence in the protection of personal data). I would like to take a brief detour here to get a clearer picture of the topic at hand, in the sense that post-quantum cryptography systems, along with generative AI, biotechnology, and so on, known as disruptive or frontier innovations and technologies, and more recently referred to as “total innovations,” are redefining the very foundations of human society, including the traditional legal environment in general and positive law in particular.
Second, an increase in “quantum litigation” is expected, driven by new specialized legal disputes. For example, we have the issue of liability related to quantum errors, given that qubits, being inherently unstable and sensitive to their environment, can result in computational errors; from this perspective, specialized lawyers will need to draft complex contracts to allocate the risks associated with such incidents. Then there are the aspects related to intellectual property; protecting algorithms or quantum material under current patent law proves to be particularly complex, requiring legal professionals with expertise in both technical and legal fields. In the same context, the dilemma regarding the relationship between international law and sovereignty also arises; quantum technologies, having dual-use applications: both civilian and military, are subject to strict export controls and complex regulations related to national security.
The prospect of transforming evidence management (E-Discovery & Metrology) is also particularly relevant. On the one hand, we are witnessing the absolute integrity of the evidence; with the introduction of quantum key distribution (QKD), law enforcement officers will be able to guarantee the transfer of legal documents and the traceability of digital evidence in a completely inviolable manner. On the other hand, we will benefit from extremely precise legal analysis; the quantum detectors (sensors)(metrology) will allow us to measure physical quantities with atomic precision. In this way, legal experts will have access to indisputable scientific data in cases involving environmental, industrial, and medical disputes and, why not, disputes related to artificial intelligence applications.
Finally, a form of “predictive justice”, fueled and invaded by quantum algorithms, will take shape and assert itself. Ultra-complex risk analyses will be available; Quantum Machine Learning (QML) will make it possible to analyze massive volumes of case law and behavioral variables at a speed far beyond that of classical computers. Furthermore, when it comes to decision-making support, law firms will be able to assess the chances of success in a lawsuit with surgical precision. But all of this also raises profound ethical questions for magistrates, related to the risk of algorithmic bias and the preservation of judicial independence. Of course, simply outlining such predictable and indisputable aspects serves to highlight the importance of the academic environment and of the issue itself. In fact, just like law and AI applications, Quantum Law, through its implications, concerns the general training of today’s and tomorrow’s legal professionals and is no longer merely a professional vanity, a way to keep up with trendy issues and contemporary and professional trends.

O. P. – As we conclude this discussion, which has focused on opening new horizons in Romanian higher education, I would like, Professor, to ask a question driven primarily by curiosity regarding terminology: why, of all places, is there such a strong emphasis on the most advanced, ultra-modern technologies at an “ecological” university?

M. D. – For a natural reason: environmentalism and ecology require constant monitoring and in-depth study and research into the relationships between humans and their living environment. The Ecological University of Bucharest is not simply a university “of ecology,” but a comprehensive, “ecological” institution, that is, one concerned with the entire spectrum of the existential, natural, and technological universe. Indeed, artificial intelligence and quantum technology are, par excellence, part of the cornerstones of the future planetary ecosystem, both individually and collectively, and all the more so because Quantum Law, along with AI law, marks a decisive milestone in contemporary legal progress.

O.P. – To conclude, Professor, I would like to congratulate you once again on your innovative and pioneering spirit, as well as on your courage in proposing new and revolutionary university courses, such as those announced on this occasion: the courses “Introduction to Quantum Technology Law” and “Quantum Artificial Intelligence Law” as part of the master’s program in “Artificial Intelligence Law” at the Ecological University of Bucharest. Also, I strongly believe that AI and quantum technologies, once integrated, will transform us humans from mere observers, as defined by classical physics, into participants in the grand theatre of the world we live in, as viewed through the lens of quantum physics and mechanics.

Prof. univ. dr. Ovidiu Predescu

Address

Boulevard Ul Doina Cornea, Nr. 1G, Sector 6 (zona Grozavesti)
Bucharest
061341

Opening Hours

Monday 08:00 - 16:00
Tuesday 08:00 - 16:00
Wednesday 08:00 - 16:00
Thursday 08:00 - 16:00
Friday 08:00 - 16:00
Saturday 09:00 - 13:00
Sunday 09:00 - 13:00

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Universitatea Ecologica din Bucuresti posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The School

Send a message to Universitatea Ecologica din Bucuresti:

Shortcuts

Share

Category