Notify individuals about the use of personal data in AI recommendations and decisions
Download: JSON · MarkdownUnder PDPC AI advisory guidelines, Advisory guidelines, section on notification obligation
What this label means
- Verified
- — a named reviewer opened the official source and confirmed the record; the date and the reviewer are shown.
- Pending review
- — linked to the official source and in the queue for a reviewer to confirm.
- Source-linked
- — linked to the official source, not yet confirmed by a reviewer.
On this page 9 sections
In brief
Notify individuals about the use of personal data in AI recommendations and decisions is a legal requirement under the PDPC AI advisory guidelines in Singapore (Advisory guidelines, section on notification obligation). Organisations should inform individuals that AI systems use their personal data, the purposes, the relevant features and how they influence decisions, proportionate to the impact on the individual.
- Instrument
- PDPC AI advisory guidelines
- Jurisdiction
- Singapore
- Nature
- Legal requirement
- Source reference
- Advisory guidelines, section on notification obligation
- Who it binds
- Deployer / user organisation
- Evidence examples
- 1
- Framework mappings
- NIST AI Risk Management Framework 1.0
- Controls that meet it
- 2
- Official source
- Open official text
- Verification
- Source-linked
What does it require?
Organisations should inform individuals that AI systems use their personal data, the purposes, the relevant features and how they influence decisions, proportionate to the impact on the individual.
Practical action
Add AI-specific disclosures to privacy notices and in-product notifications.
Who does it apply to?
Organisations deploying AI recommendation or decision systems using personal data.
- Sectors
- Cross-sector / all sectors
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.
-
satisfiesProcessProduct owner · at launch and on material changeAI interaction and use disclosure notices
Serves 18 recorded duties · evidence: AI interaction or use notice, Notice catalogue, Notice wording approval
AI-specific disclosures in privacy notices and in product.
-
supportsProcessData protection officer · once per ai systemPrivacy and data-protection controls for AI
Serves 13 recorded duties · evidence: Data protection impact assessment for an AI system, AI data-flow and legal-basis record, Privacy notice section on AI use
Privacy notice content on AI data use.
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.
- AI Agent Registry and Permission Matrix
Register · XLSX and DOCX · v6
- EU AI Act Article 50 Transparency Kit
Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v44
- NIST AI RMF ↔ EU AI Act ↔ ISO/IEC 42001 Crosswalk
Crosswalk · XLSX · v5
- AI Model Card
Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v4
What evidence would a reviewer expect?
| Evidence | Type | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| AI notification wording | document |
Framework mappings
Original editorial crosswalks. They cite clause numbers only and reproduce no standard text; confidence reflects how direct the mapping is.
See every Singapore duty mapped this way →
| Framework | Reference | Note | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| NIST AI RMF 1.0 | GOVERN 4.x | Original editorial mapping. | medium |
Frequently asked questions
Is this a legal requirement?
Yes. It is a legal requirement under PDPC AI advisory guidelines (Advisory guidelines, section on notification obligation).
Who must comply with this obligation?
Organisations deploying AI recommendation or decision systems using personal data.
What evidence shows compliance?
A reviewer would expect: AI notification wording.
Which frameworks map to this obligation?
It is mapped to NIST AI Risk Management Framework 1.0 GOVERN 4.x. These are editorial crosswalks with a stated confidence, not official mappings.
Which controls satisfy this obligation?
AI interaction and use disclosure notices; Privacy and data-protection controls for AI.
What should an organisation do in practice?
Add AI-specific disclosures to privacy notices and in-product notifications.
Cite this record
AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Notify individuals about the use of personal data in AI recommendations and decisions (PDPC AI advisory guidelines)” [AIPT-OBL-0059, verified 26 September 2026 by Bhaskar Bhatt]. https://aipolicytracker.org/id/AIPT-OBL-0059 (accessed 8 November 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.
Permanent id AIPT-OBL-0059: it never changes or gets reused, and its address keeps working if this page moves.
Cite the official text alongside it: Advisory Guidelines on Use of Personal Data in AI Recommendation and Decision Systems, Personal Data Protection Commission Singapore, https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/guidelines-and-consultation/2024/02/advisory-guidelines-on-use-of-personal-data-in-ai-recommendation-and-decision-systems.
BibTeX
@misc{aipolicytracker2026_notifyindividualsaboutth,
author = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
title = {{Notify individuals about the use of personal data in AI recommendations and decisions (PDPC AI advisory guidelines)}},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/singapore-pdpc-ai-notification}},
url = {https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/singapore-pdpc-ai-notification},
urldate = {2026-11-08},
note = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 8 November 2026}
}
Change history
No change to this record's tracked fields has been recorded since 15 October 2026, when field-level history began.
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
- Deployers must explain individual decisions taken with high-risk AI on request — EU AI Act, European Union
- Frontier developers must publish a transparency report before deploying a new frontier model — California SB 53, California (United States)
Disclaimer: informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult a qualified lawyer before acting.