On January 28th, the updated National Artificial Intelligence Policy (“AI Policy”) was published in the Official Gazette. This modification was made to align the country’s strategy with technological advances and the challenges posed by Artificial Intelligence.
Since its first version in 2021, the AI Policy has served as the roadmap for AI development in Chile. However, its rapid progress, the improvement of complementary technologies, its progressive impact on multiple sectors of industry and society, and the need to contribute to national economic growth have necessitated its update.
The AI Policy focuses on three principles. First, it emphasizes the need to develop and use AI ethically, promoting a human-centred approach and considering human oversight and accountability as key elements. Second, it recognizes AI’s potential to “diversify the economic matrix and make industries more productive.” And third, it encourages international and multi-stakeholder coordination through collaboration and dialogue in research and development between the private sector, the public sector, and academia.
Additionally, the AI Policy promotes various objectives and actions oriented toward three pillars. The first is “Enabling Factors,” such as talent development, adequate connectivity and technological infrastructure, and the promotion of data availability and its adequate protection, in the case of personal data. Another pillar includes “Development and Adoption,” referring to the opening of spaces for research, innovation, entrepreneurship, and technology-based economic development. This pillar highlights the incentives for the adoption of AI in industry and the acceleration of state modernisation through AI. Finally, the last pillar considered by the AI Policy is “Governance and Ethics,” which focuses on various relevant areas. Among these, it is worth highlighting the need for sufficient regulation and institutional framework for AI systems, environmental protection and combating the climate crisis in relation to the advancement of AI systems, the complementarity between technology, AI, and creativity in terms of intellectual property, and the development of a secure digital ecosystem.
Thus, this update to the AI Policy – led by the Ministry of Science, Technology, Knowledge, and Innovation – introduces new governance and ethics requirements, incorporating international standards for its development and implementation.
However, the AI Policy is framed in a context lacking a specific national regulatory framework for AI.
This is where the bill “Regulating Artificial Intelligence Systems,” introduced by the Government in May 2024 and currently being processed in Congress, takes on special relevance. Its objective is to establish principles and rules that allow for the adoption of this technology in a manner that is safe, respectful of fundamental rights, and aligned with the public interest.
The Draft reflects the international regulatory trend and adopts a risk-based approach similar to that of the European Union by classifying AI systems into four categories: (i) unacceptable risk, corresponding to systems that are prohibited due to their potential for manipulation, mass surveillance, or discrimination; (ii) high risk, subject to strict transparency, human oversight, and security requirements; (iii) limited risk, requiring clear information measures for users; and (iv) no evident risk.
This structure would provide an adaptable framework for different uses of AI, with clear boundaries to prevent abuse and mitigate risks, as well as avoid overly restrictive regulation that stifles innovation.
Now, how does the AI Policy relate to the Draft? One of the most notable aspects of the updated AI Policy is its emphasis on AI ethics and governance, respect for fundamental rights, fairness, transparency, and explainability. In this sense, there are important points of convergence with the Draft, which also incorporates principles such as transparency, explainability, security by design, personal data protection, and human oversight.
Another important point of agreement between the AI Policy and the Draft Law is the institutional framework responsible for ensuring compliance with these regulations. According to the Draft Law, the Personal Data Protection Agency will play a key role in overseeing AI systems, whose technical and operational capacity will be crucial to ensuring that regulations do not remain solely on paper.
However, the major difference between the AI Policy and the Draft is that the former establishes general guidelines, while the latter proposes concrete and enforceable standards. While the AI Policy focuses on recommendations, the legislation will establish obligations, oversight mechanisms, and sanctions for non-compliance.
Ultimately, Chile has the opportunity to position itself as a benchmark in the ethical and responsible regulation of AI in Latin America. To achieve this, however, it is necessary to move forward decisively in creating a robust, flexible regulatory framework adapted to the challenges this technology poses. Thus, as long as the legislative process of the Draft Bill does not advance, the AI Policy will continue to be a mere set of general guidelines, lacking binding force, specific obligations, and sanctions in case of non-compliance.
Be part of a growing global community committed to advancing in-house legal leadership.
In early April, the Central Bank of Brazil (BCB) published the Social Participation Notice No. 118/2025, initiating the Subsidy Collection No. 118/2025. The initiative seeks...
Learn more about Central Bank opens public consultation on regulation of digital wallets
Economy Minister Luis Caputo recently announced a series of measures aimed at easing the exchange control regime, commonly known as “cepo,” which has been in...
