Deployers must explain individual decisions taken with high-risk AI on request

Practical action

Set up a request channel and an explanation template that names the system's role, the key inputs and the human decision points for each affected process.

Who does it apply to?

Deployers using Annex III high-risk systems for decisions with legal or similarly significant effects on individuals; overlaps with GDPR Article 22 rights.

Actors

Deployer / user organisationPublic authority / government body

Sectors

Cross-sector / all sectorsEmployment and HRFinancial services and creditEducation and trainingPublic services and government

Use cases

AI in hiring and employmentAI in finance, credit and insuranceAI in educationAI in public services

Applies from: 2 December 2027

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.

• satisfiesProcessCustomer operations lead · once per ai system
  Decision explanation, human review and appeal route

  Serves 12 recorded duties · evidence: Adverse-decision explanation template, AI decision challenge and human review procedure, Challenge and reversal log

  Request channel and explanation of the system's role and main decision elements.

• supportsTechnical measureEngineering lead · continuous
  Automatic event logging and record retention

  Serves 9 recorded duties · evidence: AI system event logs, Log schema and retention standard, Log integrity and retention check

  Logs supply the inputs cited in the explanation.

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.

• EU AI Act Role and Risk Classifier

  Checklist · XLSX · v4

• AI Agent Registry and Permission Matrix

  Register · XLSX and DOCX · v6

• EU AI Act Article 50 Transparency Kit

  Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v44

• ISO/IEC 42001 Gap Assessment and Statement of Applicability

  Assessment · XLSX · v3

All 10 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 European Union duty mapped this way →

Frequently asked questions

Cite this record

AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Deployers must explain individual decisions taken with high-risk AI on request (EU AI Act)” [AIPT-OBL-0047, verified 26 September 2026]. https://aipolicytracker.org/id/AIPT-OBL-0047 (accessed 8 November 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.

Permanent id AIPT-OBL-0047: it never changes or gets reused, and its address keeps working if this page moves.

Cite the official text alongside it: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence, Official Journal of the European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj.

@misc{aipolicytracker2026_deployersmustexplainindi,
  author       = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
  title        = {{Deployers must explain individual decisions taken with high-risk AI on request (EU AI Act)}},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/eu-ai-act-art-86-right-to-explanation}},
  url          = {https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/eu-ai-act-art-86-right-to-explanation},
  urldate      = {2026-11-08},
  note         = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 8 November 2026}
}

Change history

Similar obligations in other instruments

• Employers must inform workers and their representatives before using high-risk AI at work — EU AI Act, European Union
• Disclose AI interaction and label synthetic content — EU AI Act, European Union
• Deployers must tell natural persons that a high-risk AI system is used in decisions about them — EU AI Act, European Union
• Deployers of emotion recognition or biometric categorisation must inform exposed persons — EU AI Act, European Union
• Deployers must disclose deepfakes and AI-generated text published on matters of public interest — EU AI Act, European Union
• Providers of generative AI must mark synthetic output as artificially generated in a machine-readable way — EU AI Act, European Union
• Frontier developers must publish a transparency report before deploying a new frontier model — California SB 53, California (United States)
• Provide deployers with clear instructions for use — EU AI Act, European Union