The Principle of Transparency in AI Regulation: A Comparative Legal Analysis of the European and Chinese Approaches
https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2025.4.34.801-828
Abstract
The paper examines the principle of transparency in artificial intelligence (AI) regulations in two legal frameworks, namely, the European Union (EU) and China. The study aims to explore how transparency, a key principle for ensuring accountability and fostering trust in AI technologies, is regulated in these two distinct geopolitical environments. Using a comparative legal analysis approach, the paper reviews primary legal documents, scholarly literature, and expert analyses to identify commonalities and divergences in AI transparency regulations. The findings indicate that the EU’s AI Act emphasizes a risk-based approach, categorizing AI systems into high-risk, limited-risk, and minimal-risk categories, with stringent transparency requirements for high-risk systems. These requirements include comprehensive documentation, human oversight, and explainability to ensure that AI systems operate within ethical and legal boundaries. However, the AI Act also holds challenges, particularly for smaller enterprises, in meeting these transparency demands, as well as the technical difficulties in achieving transparency in complex AI models. In contrast, China’s regulatory framework, while similarly focused on transparency, integrates socialist moral and ethical values. The Chinese approach categorizes AI systems based on risk and emphasizes the interpretability and explainability of AI systems to ensure compliance with state-sanctioned moral principles. The findings suggest that while both the EU and China recognize the importance of transparency, their regulatory frameworks reflect broader cultural and political differences. The study concludes that achieving harmonized global AI transparency standards will require ongoing technological innovation, legal refinement, and international cooperation.
About the Authors
Yu. KharitonovaRussian Federation
Yulia Kharitonova, Research and Education Center for Legal Studies of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Economy
G. F. Lendvai
Hungary
Gergely Ferenc Lendvai, Department of Public Administration & Digital Authoritarianism Research Lab
References
1. Arrieta, A.B., Díaz-Rodríguez, N., Del Ser, J., Bennetot, A., Tabik, S., Barbado, A., Garcia, S., Gil-Lopez, S., Molina, D., Benjamins, R., Chatila, R. and Herrera, F., (2019). Explainable Arti¿cial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. In Information Fusion, 58, pp. 82–115, doi: 10.1016/j.inɣus.2019.12.012.
2. Birrer, A. and Just, N., (2024). What we know and don’t know about deepfakes: An investigation into the state of the research and regulatory landscape. New Media & Society, doi: 10.1177/14614448241253138.
3. Busuioc, M., Curtin, D. and Almada, M., (2022). Reclaiming transparency: contesting the logics of secrecy within the AI Act. European Law Open, 2(1), pp. 79–105, doi: 10.1017/elo.2022.47.
4. Castelvecchi, D., (2016). Can we open the black box of AI? Nature, 538(7623), pp. 20–23, doi: 10.1038/538020a.
5. Chaudhary, G., (2024). Unveiling the Black Box: Bringing Algorithmic Transparency to AI. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 18(1), pp. 93–122, doi: 10.5817/mujlt2024-1-4.
6. Diakopoulos, N. and Koliska, M., (2017). Algorithmic Transparency in the News Media. Digital Journalism, 5(7), pp. 809–828.
7. Durán, J.M. and Jongsma, K.R., (2021). Who is afraid of black box algorithms? On the epistemological and ethical basis of trust in medical AI. Journal of Medical Ethics, medethics-106820, doi. 10.1136/medethics-2020-106820.
8. Escobar, G.G., (2024). Fragmentation in the European and Inter-American human rights courts regarding the scope of religious autonomy: An analysis of the use of sources and methodologies. Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, 13(1), pp. 67–84, doi: 10.1093/ojlr/rwae022.
9. Golpayegani, D., Pandit, H.J. and Lewis, D., (2023). To Be High-Risk, or Not To Be — Semantic Specifcations and Implications of the AI Act’s High-Risk AI Applications and Harmonised Standards. ACM International Conference Proceedings, 12 June 2023, pp. 905–915, doi: 10.1145/3593013.3594050.
10. Gosztonyi, G. and Lendvai, G.F., (2023). Deepfake: A Multifaceted Dilemma in Ethics and Law. Journal of Information Ethics, 32(2), pp. 109–112, doi: 10.2307/JIE.32.2.109.
11. Gryz, J. and Rojszczak, M., (2021). Black box algorithms and the rights of individuals: no easy solution to the “explainability” problem. Internet Policy Review, 10(2), doi: 10.14763/2021.2.1564.
12. Helberger, N. and Diakopoulos, N., (2022). The European AI Act and How It Matters for Research into AI in Media and Journalism. Digital Journalism, 11(9), pp. 1751–1760, doi: 10.1080/21670811.2022.2082505.
13. Hosain, M.T., Anik, M.H., Rafi , S., Tabassum, R., Insia, K. and Siddiky, M.M., (2023). Path to Gain Functional Transparency in Artifcial Intelligence with Meaningful Explainability. Journal of Metaverse, 3(2), pp. 166–180, doi: 10.57019/jmv.1306685.
14. Kharitonova, Y.S. and Tianfang, Y., (2022). Recommender Systems of Digital Platforms in China: Legal Approaches and Practices for Ensuring Algorithm Transparency. Zakon, 9, pp. 40–49, doi: 10.37239/0869-4400-2022-19-9-40-49.
15. Larsson, S. and Heintz, F., (2020). Transparency in artifcial intelligence. Internet Policy Review, 9(2), pp. 1–16, doi: 10.14763/2020.2.1469.
16. Lendvai, G.F. and Gosztonyi, G., (2024). Deepfake y desinformación — ¿Qué puede hacer el derecho frente a las noticias falsas creadas por deepfake? IDP Revista De Internet Derecho Y Política, 41, doi: 10.7238/idp.v0i41.427515.
17. Litwin, A.S. and Racabi, G., (2024). Varieties of AI Regulations: the United States perspective. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 77(5), pp. 799–812, doi: 10.1177/00197939241278956a.
18. Mania, K., (2022). Legal Protection of Revenge and Deepfake Porn Victims in the European Union: Findings from a Comparative Legal Study. Trauma Violence & Abuse, 25(1), pp. 117–129, doi: 10.1177/15248380221143772.
19. Maslova, E.A. and Sorokova, E.D., (2022). The Dialectics of Ethics and Law in the Regulation of Artifcial Intelligence: Case of the EU. Sovremennaya Evropa, 5, pp. 19–33, doi: 10.31857/S0201708322050023. (In Russ.).
20. Miller, T., (2018). Explanation in arti¿cial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences. Artifcial Intelligence, 267, pp. 1–38, doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007.
21. Moreno, F.R., (2024). Generative AI and deepfakes: a human rights approach to tackling harmful content. International Review of Law Computers & Technology, 38(3), pp. 297–326, doi: 10.1080/13600869.2024.2324540.
22. Mourby, M., Cathaoir, K.Ó. and Collin, C.B., (2021). Transparency of machine-learning in healthcare: The GDPR & European health law. Computer Law & Security Review, 43, p. 105611, doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2021.105611.
23. Novelli, C., Casolari, F., Rotolo, A., Taddeo, M. and Floridi, L., (2023). Taking AI risks seriously: a new assessment model for the AI Act. AI & Society, doi: 10.1007/s00146-023-01723-z.
24. Novelli, C., Gaur, A. and Floridi, L., (2025). Two Futures of AI Regulation under the Trump Administration. SSRN preprint, pp. 1–13. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5198926 [Accessed 10.12.2025].
25. Papadouli, J.S., (2022). Transparency in Artifcial Intelligence: A Legal Perspective. Journal of Ethics and Legal Technologies, 4(1), pp. 24–40.
26. Pošüiü, A. and Martinoviü, A., (2023). Regulatory Sandboxes under the Draft EU Artifcial Intelligence Act: An Opportunity for SMEs InterEULawEast Journal for the International and European Law Economics and Market Integrations, 9(2), pp. 71–117, doi: 10.22598/iele.2022.9.2.3.
27. Pu, K. and Xiang, W., (2023). Opportunities and challenges in using ChatGPT as generative AI and response strategy. Journal of Chongqing University, 29(3), pp. 102–114.
28. Raja, A.K. and Zhou, J., (2023). AI Accountability: Approaches, Aɣecting Factors, and Challenges. Computer, 56(4), pp. 61–70, doi. 10.1109/mc.2023.3238390.
29. Shen, F., (2024). Risk and management of generative artifcial intelligence: solving the “Collingridge’s dilemma.” Journal of Zhejiang University, 6, pp. 73–91.
30. Söderlund, K., Engström, E., Haresamudram, K., Larsson, S. and Strimling, P., (2024). Regulating high-reach AI: On transparency directions in the Digital Services Act. Internet Policy Review, 13(1), doi: 10.14763/2024.1.1746.
31. Song, H., (2024). Development of normative structure in artifcial intelligence legislation. Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law, 5.
32. Tartaro, N., (2023). Regulating by standards: current progress and main challenges in the standardisation of Artifcial Intelligence in support of the AI Act. European Journal of Privacy Law & Technologies, 1, pp. 147–174, doi: 10.57230/ejplt222at.
33. Troshchinsky, P.V., (2015). Development of Chinese legislation in recent years. International Public and Private Law, 3, pp. 36–40.
34. Yao, Z.W. and Li, Z.L., (2023). Legal risk regulation of generative artifcial intelligence content. Journal of Xi’an Jiaotong University, 43(5), pp. 147–160. (In Russ.).
35. Vesnic-Alujevic, L., Nascimento, S. and Pólvora, A., (2020). Societal and ethical impacts of artifcial intelligence: Critical notes on European policy frameworks. Telecommunications Policy, 44(6), p. 101961, doi: 10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101961.
36. Walmsley, J., (2020). Artifcial intelligence and the value of transparency. AI & Society, 36(2), pp. 585–595, doi: 10.1007/s00146-020-01066-z.
37. Zhao, C. and Zhou, J., (2024). On the paradigm shift of digital legal research: systemic risk management. Qiushi Academic Journal, 4(136).
38. Zhang, Y., (2024). On the legal realization of the principle of transparency in the feld of artifcial intelligence. Policy and Legal Discussion Series, 2. p. 124.
Review
For citations:
Kharitonova Yu., Lendvai G. The Principle of Transparency in AI Regulation: A Comparative Legal Analysis of the European and Chinese Approaches. Kutafin Law Review. 2025;12(4):801-828. https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2025.4.34.801-828
JATS XML






















