{"slug":"decision-explanation-and-appeal-route","id":"AIPT-CTL-0013","title":"Decision explanation, human review and appeal route","kind":"process","kind_label":"Process","purpose":"Gives people affected by a significant automated or AI-assisted decision a meaningful explanation, a way to correct the data behind it, and a route to have a person reconsider it.\n","description":"For each decision point that has legal or similarly significant effects, the owner defines what the person is told after the decision: the main reasons, the data relied on and its sources, and how to challenge the outcome. Complaint and customer-service procedures are extended with an AI-decision challenge path staffed by people with the authority and information to change the result, and with target response times. Requests, outcomes and reversals are logged and reviewed, both to satisfy individual rights and to detect systematic problems that should feed back into the model or the oversight design.\n","owner_role":"Customer operations lead","frequency":"per_system","frequency_label":"Once per AI system","risk_subdomains":["5.2","1.1","7.4"],"evidence":[{"type":"disclosure_notice","title":"Adverse-decision explanation template","description":null},{"type":"procedure","title":"AI decision challenge and human review procedure","description":"Intake route, reviewer authority, response times and record-keeping for challenges."},{"type":"monitoring_record","title":"Challenge and reversal log","description":null}],"framework_references":[{"framework":"iso_42001","framework_name":"ISO/IEC 42001:2023","reference":"Annex A.8.2, A.8.3, A.9.2","note":null,"confidence_level":"medium"},{"framework":"nist_ai_rmf","framework_name":"NIST AI RMF 1.0","reference":"MEASURE 2.9; GOVERN 5.1; MANAGE 4.1","note":null,"confidence_level":"medium"},{"framework":"oecd_ai_principles","framework_name":"OECD AI Principles","reference":"Principle 1.3 Transparency and explainability","note":null,"confidence_level":"high"}],"obligations":[{"slug":"australia-vaiss-contestability-supply-chain-records","title":"Provide contestability, supply-chain transparency and records (guardrails 7 to 9)","relationship":"supports","note":"Challenge process for impacted people.","confidence_level":"high","is_binding":false,"policy":"australia-voluntary-ai-safety-standard","jurisdiction":"australia","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/australia-vaiss-contestability-supply-chain-records"},{"slug":"eu-ai-act-art-26-11-notice-to-affected-persons","title":"Deployers must tell natural persons that a high-risk AI system is used in decisions about them","relationship":"supports","note":"Notice links to the Article 86 explanation route.","confidence_level":"medium","is_binding":true,"policy":"eu-ai-act","jurisdiction":"eu","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/eu-ai-act-art-26-11-notice-to-affected-persons"},{"slug":"uk-principles-transparency-explainability","title":"Provide appropriate transparency and explainability","relationship":"supports","note":"Explanations of decisions about individuals.","confidence_level":"high","is_binding":false,"policy":"uk-ai-regulation-white-paper","jurisdiction":"uk","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/uk-principles-transparency-explainability"},{"slug":"uk-principles-contestability-redress","title":"Provide routes to contest AI outcomes and seek redress","relationship":"satisfies","note":"An AI-decision challenge path within complaint procedures.","confidence_level":"high","is_binding":false,"policy":"uk-ai-regulation-white-paper","jurisdiction":"uk","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/uk-principles-contestability-redress"},{"slug":"uk-ico-automated-decision-safeguards","title":"Apply safeguards to solely automated decisions with significant effects","relationship":"satisfies","note":"Notice, human intervention and contest route for significant automated decisions.","confidence_level":"high","is_binding":true,"policy":"uk-ico-ai-data-protection-guidance","jurisdiction":"uk","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/uk-ico-automated-decision-safeguards"},{"slug":"eu-ai-act-art-86-right-to-explanation","title":"Deployers must explain individual decisions taken with high-risk AI on request","relationship":"satisfies","note":"Request channel and explanation of the system's role and main decision elements.","confidence_level":"high","is_binding":true,"policy":"eu-ai-act","jurisdiction":"eu","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/eu-ai-act-art-86-right-to-explanation"},{"slug":"us-colorado-admt-adverse-decision-disclosure","title":"Disclose the use of the technology and the principal reasons after an adverse consequential decision","relationship":"satisfies","note":"Adverse-decision reasons, the role of the tool and the review route.","confidence_level":"high","is_binding":true,"policy":"us-colorado-automated-decision-making-technology-act","jurisdiction":"us-colorado","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-colorado-admt-adverse-decision-disclosure"},{"slug":"us-colorado-admt-human-review","title":"Offer meaningful human review of an adverse consequential decision","relationship":"supports","note":"The request channel that leads to review.","confidence_level":"medium","is_binding":true,"policy":"us-colorado-automated-decision-making-technology-act","jurisdiction":"us-colorado","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-colorado-admt-human-review"},{"slug":"uae-pdpl-automated-decision-objection","title":"Respect the right to object to automated decision-making without human intervention","relationship":"satisfies","note":"Provides the human-review route for solely automated decisions.","confidence_level":"high","is_binding":true,"policy":"uae-personal-data-protection-law","jurisdiction":"uae","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/uae-pdpl-automated-decision-objection"},{"slug":"south-korea-ai-basic-act-art-34-high-impact-ai-explanation-measures","title":"Operators of high-impact AI must be able to explain outputs and the main criteria behind them","relationship":"satisfies","note":"Explanation of results and criteria to affected people.","confidence_level":"medium","is_binding":true,"policy":"south-korea-framework-act-on-the-development-of-artificial-intelligence-and-establishment-of-a-foundation-for","jurisdiction":"south-korea","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/south-korea-ai-basic-act-art-34-high-impact-ai-explanation-measures"},{"slug":"us-colorado-consumer-notice-and-adverse-decision-explanation","title":"Notify consumers and explain adverse consequential decisions","relationship":"satisfies","note":"Adverse-decision reasons, data correction and appeal for human review.","confidence_level":"high","is_binding":true,"policy":"us-colorado-ai-act","jurisdiction":"us-colorado","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-colorado-consumer-notice-and-adverse-decision-explanation"},{"slug":"us-new-york-city-local-law-144-alternative-process-request","title":"Employers and employment agencies must let candidates request an alternative selection process or accommodation","relationship":"satisfies","note":"Request channel and handling record for alternatives and accommodations.","confidence_level":"medium","is_binding":true,"policy":"us-new-york-city-local-law-144-automated-employment-decision-tools","jurisdiction":"us-new-york","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-new-york-city-local-law-144-alternative-process-request"}],"related_controls":["human-oversight-and-override","ai-interaction-and-use-disclosure","record-keeping-and-logging"],"review_status":"verified","confidence_level":"high","last_verified_at":"2026-09-26","reviewed_by":"Bhaskar Bhatt","updated_at":"2026-10-15T06:46:22+00:00","url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/controls/decision-explanation-and-appeal-route","context_url":"https://aipolicytracker.org/controls/decision-explanation-and-appeal-route.md"}