EU AI Act Article 5(1)(f) — Prohibition on inferring emotions in the workplace and in education institutions
AI systems that infer emotions of natural persons in the workplace or in education institutions are prohibited, unless intended for medical or safety reasons
Where this comes from
Provision: Article 5(1)(f) — Prohibition on inferring emotions in the workplace and in education institutions
Instrument: EU Artificial Intelligence Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689)
Citation: Article 5(1)(f), Regulation (EU) 2024/1689
Text version: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act), OJ L, 12.7.2024
Checked against the source: 2 September 2026
Who it applies to
AI system in scope of the Act (Art. 2) — all of these:
- Service deploys AI systems in a professional capacity
…unless:
- AI Act scope exclusion is used exclusively for military, defence or national-security purposes or developed and used solely for scientific research and development
- Art. 2(3): the Regulation 'does not apply to AI systems where and in so far as they are placed on the market, put into service, or used with or without modification exclusively for military, defence or national security purposes'. (AI Act Art. 2(3))
- Art. 2(6): the Regulation 'does not apply to AI systems or AI models, including their output, specifically developed and put into service for the sole purpose of scientific research and development'. (AI Act Art. 2(6))
- Art. 5(1)(f) does not apply 'where the use of the AI system is intended to be put in place or into the market for medical or safety reasons' — for example fatigue detection intended to protect a worker's safety. (AI Act Art. 5(1)(f), final clause)
Scope in the source's own terms
- Art. 2(1): the AI system is placed on the market or put into service in the Union, or the provider/deployer is established in the Union, or the output produced by the system is used in the Union
- Art. 5(1)(f): the system infers emotions of a natural person, typically from facial, vocal or other physiological/biometric signals
- Art. 5(1)(f): the inference happens 'in the areas of workplace and education institutions' — the prohibition is confined to those two settings
What engineering work it implies
Sample acceptance criteria Landfall generates for this obligation:
- Every AI system and material feature is checked against this prohibition and the result is recorded per system, with a date and an owner
- A signed attestation states that the practice is not present, naming who is accountable for it
- A design-review gate asks this question before a new AI feature ships, so a future introduction is caught rather than assumed away
- Where the prohibition carries a narrow exception, reliance on it is documented with the specific facts, not asserted generically
- Third-party and vendor AI components are covered by the same check, with the obligation flowed down contractually
Evidence an auditor expects
- Assessment documentDocument review
Prohibited-practice screening attestation for Art. 5(1)(f)
Signed assessment recording whether any deployed system infers emotions of natural persons in a workplace or education institution and, if so, the medical or safety reason relied on under the final clause of Art. 5(1)(f)
- Technical controlTechnical audit
Deployment restriction preventing emotion inference in workplace and education contexts
Configuration evidence that the emotion-inference capability is disabled for workplace and education deployments, or restricted to the documented medical/safety use
Questions people ask
- Does EU AI Act Article 5(1)(f) — Prohibition on inferring emotions in the workplac… apply to my service?
- It applies when Service deploys AI systems in a professional capacity. It does not apply where AI Act scope exclusion is used exclusively for military, defence or national-security purposes or developed and used solely for scientific research and development.
- When does this become enforceable?
- EU AI Act Article 5(1)(f) — Prohibition on inferring emotions in the workplac… is enforceable from 2 February 2025. Its current status is: in force.
- What evidence does an auditor expect?
- Prohibited-practice screening attestation for Art. 5(1)(f); Deployment restriction preventing emotion inference in workplace and education contexts.
Find out whether this one lands on you
Landfall's pre-scan answers the applicability question above for your product in minutes, then turns every obligation that applies into traceable engineering tickets with a citation chain your auditors can follow.
Not legal advice. Landfall maps regulatory obligations to engineering work for planning purposes. Its verdicts are not legal advice and create no attorney-client relationship — verify with qualified counsel before relying on them.