Operators of high-impact AI must ensure human management and supervision

Practical action

Assign accountable supervisors for each high-impact system and design the interface so they can pause, correct or overrule outputs.

Who does it apply to?

AI business operators providing high-impact AI or products and services based on it.

Actors

Provider / developerDeployer / user organisationPublic authority / government body

Sectors

Cross-sector / all sectorsEmployment and HRFinancial services and creditHealthcare and life sciencesPublic services and governmentCritical infrastructure and utilities

Use cases

AI in hiring and employmentAI in healthcareAI in finance, credit and insuranceAI in public servicesSafety-critical and infrastructure

Applies from: 22 January 2026

Which controls meet this duty?

Satisfies: the control, operated properly, does the work the duty asks for. Supports: it contributes but the duty needs more. Each control page lists every other duty it serves, so work done once can be counted once.

• satisfiesProcessAI system owner · once per ai system
  Human oversight design and override procedure

  Serves 12 recorded duties · evidence: Human oversight and override procedure, Human-involvement design rationale, Overseer training completion

  Named supervisors with monitoring and override capability.

Templates that cover this duty

Generated from the records. Free · no account · links emailed to your work address. This duty is cited in each file with its source reference and a link back here.

• Human Oversight Procedure

  Procedure · DOCX and XLSX · v5

• AI Agent Registry and Permission Matrix

  Register · XLSX and DOCX · v6

• ISO/IEC 42001 Gap Assessment and Statement of Applicability

  Assessment · XLSX · v3

• NIST AI RMF ↔ EU AI Act ↔ ISO/IEC 42001 Crosswalk

  Crosswalk · XLSX · v5

All 9 templates that cover it →

What evidence would a reviewer expect?

Framework mappings

Original editorial crosswalks. They cite clause numbers only and reproduce no standard text; confidence reflects how direct the mapping is.

See every South Korea duty mapped this way →

Frequently asked questions

Cite this record

AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Operators of high-impact AI must ensure human management and supervision (AI Basic Act)” [AIPT-OBL-0065, verified 26 September 2026 by Bhaskar Bhatt]. https://aipolicytracker.org/id/AIPT-OBL-0065 (accessed 8 November 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.

Permanent id AIPT-OBL-0065: it never changes or gets reused, and its address keeps working if this page moves.

Cite the official text alongside it: Framework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust (AI Basic Act, Act No. 20676), Korea Ministry of Government Legislation, National Law Information Center, https://www.law.go.kr/lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=268543.

@misc{aipolicytracker2026_operatorsofhighimpactaim,
  author       = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
  title        = {{Operators of high-impact AI must ensure human management and supervision (AI Basic Act)}},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/south-korea-ai-basic-act-art-34-high-impact-ai-human-oversight}},
  url          = {https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/south-korea-ai-basic-act-art-34-high-impact-ai-human-oversight},
  urldate      = {2026-11-08},
  note         = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 8 November 2026}
}

Change history

Similar obligations in other instruments

• Employers and employment agencies must let candidates request an alternative selection process or accommodation — NYC Local Law 144 (automated employment decision tools), New York (United States)
• Enable and assign effective human oversight — EU AI Act, European Union
• Offer meaningful human review of an adverse consequential decision — Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189), Colorado (United States)
• Respect the right to object to automated decision-making without human intervention — UAE PDPL, United Arab Emirates
• Apply safeguards to solely automated decisions with significant effects — ICO AI guidance, United Kingdom
• Provide routes to contest AI outcomes and seek redress — UK AI regulation framework, United Kingdom (voluntary)
• Determine the appropriate level of human involvement in AI decisions — Singapore Model AI Governance Framework, Singapore (voluntary)
• Test and monitor systems, enable human control, and be transparent with users (guardrails 4 to 6) — Australian Voluntary AI Safety Standard, Australia (voluntary)