Search and filter source-backed AI laws, regulations, standards, guidance and consultations. Each record shows its status, key dates, verification state and official source.
53 of 244 instruments match · page 1 of 3
Government of Alberta Artificial Intelligence Usage Policy
Lets Alberta public servants use AI responsibly, within a list of approved AI platforms and use cases kept by the Ministry of Technology and Innovation; non-compliance can lead to discipline under the Public Service Act.
人工智慧基本法 (Artificial Intelligence Basic Act) – draft approved by the Executive Yuan, July 2024
A framework act setting seven principles for AI development and use, requiring the government to promote AI research, talent and infrastructure, to establish a risk-classification framework and safety standards, to protect personal data, labour and consumers, to provide for liability, disclosure of AI-generated content and non-discrimination, and to designate competent authorities by sector, with the NSTC coordinating.
BC Public Service policy on the use of generative AI
Bars BC public servants from entering confidential or personal information into public generative-AI tools, allows it only in tools covered by the government's Microsoft agreement when signed in with a government account, and requires staff to verify outputs.
Calabria Regional Law No. 4 of 2 February 2026 on the use of artificial intelligence systems in the region
Legge regionale 2 febbraio 2026, n. 4, "Disposizioni concernenti l'impiego di sistemi di intelligenza artificiale in ambito regionale"
Governs the use of AI in the regional administration, with human review, data protection and transparency; sets up a health-AI pilot programme, a voluntary regional register of AI developers and a regional AI Office.
California SB 813: Independent verification organizations for AI (Chapter 179, Statutes of 2026)
The Government Operations Agency must, by 1 January 2028, set up a process to designate and oversee independent verification organisations that assess AI models and applications. The law does not require any developer to use one.
Executive Order 14179: Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence
Executive Order 14179, signed 23 January 2025, sets US federal policy to sustain and enhance American AI dominance, directs the development of an AI Action Plan within 180 days, and orders agencies to review and revise or rescind actions taken under the revoked Executive Order 14110 that are inconsistent with the new policy. It also called for revision of the OMB memoranda governing federal agency use and procurement of AI, which OMB replaced in April 2025 with M-25-21 and M-25-22.
Executive Order 14365: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence
Directs the Attorney General to set up an AI Litigation Task Force to challenge state AI laws, asks the Commerce Department to identify "onerous" state AI laws (with non-deployment broadband (BEAD) funds tied to that list), and asks the FTC for a policy statement on AI outputs. It does not itself pre-empt any state law; that would take legislation or a court ruling.
Extremadura Decree-law 2/2023 of 8 March on urgent measures to promote artificial intelligence
Decreto-ley 2/2023, de 8 de marzo, de medidas urgentes de impulso a la inteligencia artificial en Extremadura
A framework to support and promote AI in Extremadura under principles of ethical and transparent AI; it required the regional government to adopt an Extremadura AI strategy within nine months.
Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law (CETS No. 225)
The first international treaty on AI. Parties must adopt or maintain measures so that activities within the lifecycle of AI systems are consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law, covering public authorities and actors on their behalf and, by choice of approach, private actors. It sets principles (human dignity and autonomy, transparency and oversight, accountability, equality and non-discrimination, privacy, reliability, safe innovation), requires remedies, procedural safeguards and risk and impact assessment, allows moratoria or bans for incompatible uses, and creates a Conference of the Parties for follow-up. National-security activities and defence are excluded.
Galician Law 2/2025 of 2 April for the development and promotion of artificial intelligence in Galicia
Lei 2/2025, do 2 de abril, para o desenvolvemento e impulso da intelixencia artificial en Galicia
Sets the framework for how the Galician administration and regional public sector design, procure, deploy and use AI. It creates a Galician AI Office, a Galician AI Council and AI commissioners within departments, and provides for a regulatory sandbox and support for start-ups.
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and DPDP Rules, 2025
The DPDP Act is India's cross-sector personal-data law. It applies to digital personal data processed in India and to processing outside India connected with offering goods or services to people in India. It requires a lawful basis (consent or specified legitimate uses), notice, purpose limitation, data accuracy, security safeguards, breach notification to the Data Protection Board and affected individuals, and grants rights of access, correction, erasure and grievance redress. Significant Data Fiduciaries face extra duties such as impact assessments and audits. The Act does not mention AI specifically, but it governs the personal data used to train and operate AI systems.
Ley para el Fomento de la Inteligencia Artificial y Tecnologías Emergentes (Decreto Legislativo, febrero de 2025)
Approved by the Legislative Assembly in February 2025, the law promotes AI development and investment, creates the National Agency for Artificial Intelligence (ANIA) as regulator, defines rights and principles (human oversight, transparency, non-discrimination, data protection), sets registration and sandbox mechanisms and limits liability of developers who act in good faith under the law, alongside data-processing rules for AI training.
Legge 23 settembre 2025, n. 132 – Disposizioni e deleghe al Governo in materia di intelligenza artificiale
Italy's framework AI law, published in the Official Gazette on 25 September 2025 and in force from 10 October 2025. It states principles (human-centric, transparent, safe AI; protection of fundamental rights), sets sector rules for healthcare (AI as support, not replacement, for clinical decisions), employment (information to workers, an AI-at-work observatory), intellectual professions (client disclosure), justice (judge decides; AI only for organisational support) and public administration, requires parental consent for children under 14, designates AgID and ACN as national authorities, delegates the government to align national law with the EU AI Act, and creates a criminal offence for unlawful dissemination of AI-generated or manipulated content with aggravating circumstances for other crimes committed with AI.
Individual Privacy Act, 2075 (2018) — Nepal
The Individual Privacy Act 2075 gives effect to the constitutional right to privacy in Nepal. It regulates the collection, storage, processing, use and disclosure of personal information by public bodies and private entities, requires consent for collection and use of personal data subject to exceptions, restricts sensitive data, and provides remedies and penalties. It is the main binding law affecting AI systems that process personal data in Nepal. The Individual Privacy Regulation 2077 (2020) provides implementing rules.
NSW AI Operational Policy and Circular DCS-2026-02: Use of Artificial Intelligence by NSW Government Agencies
Replaces the NSW AI Ethics Policy and adopts Australia's AI Ethics Principles. Agencies must use the NSW AI Assessment Framework and give NSW GovAI a signed annual attestation by 31 October each year, the first due by 31 October 2027.
OMB Memorandum M-25-21: Accelerating Federal Use of AI through Innovation, Governance, and Public Trust
M-25-21 directs US federal agencies on how to govern and use AI. It requires agencies to designate Chief AI Officers, maintain AI governance boards, publish AI use-case inventories, and apply minimum risk-management practices to "high-impact" AI, including pre-deployment testing, AI impact assessments, ongoing monitoring, human oversight and training, and remedies for affected individuals. It replaced the 2024 memoranda with a greater emphasis on adoption and innovation while retaining core risk practices.
Paraná Law No. 22,324 of 2 April 2025: AI guidelines for the state public administration (PDIA/PR)
Lei nº 22.324, de 2 de abril de 2025 (Plano de Diretrizes de Inteligência Artificial na Administração Pública Estadual)
Requires AI used by the state executive to be ethical, transparent, explainable and auditable, with a regulatory sandbox and staff training; it also renamed the innovation department the Secretariat of Innovation and Artificial Intelligence. Decree 9854 of 7 May 2025 regulates the state AI council.
Queensland Government Artificial Intelligence Governance Policy (QGEA)
Queensland departments must carry out a Foundational AI Risk Assessment (FAIRA, or FAIRA Lite for low-risk work, or an agreed equivalent) and set up AI governance with regard to ISO/IEC 38507.
Seoul Metropolitan Government Ordinance on Supporting AI Literacy Education
서울특별시 인공지능 활용 능력 교육 지원 조례
A promotional ordinance under which the Seoul Metropolitan Government supports AI literacy education for citizens.
South Australian Government Artificial Intelligence Ethics Policy (v1.0)
A mandatory policy requiring SA government agencies to align their AI systems with the Australian Government's AI Ethics Principles; a separate policy on responsible use and disclosure is being developed.
Filters
Anything a government or standards body has actually issued: acts, regulations, executive orders, rules, national strategies, frameworks, guidance, codes of practice, voluntary standards and open consultations. Each record states which of those it is, whether it binds anyone, and links the official source it was read from.
A record is marked verified only after a named reviewer has opened its official source and confirmed each field. Anything that has not been through that carries "pending review" on the record itself, and the data-health document reports the current totals. Nothing here is legal advice.
Every record carries the date its source document was published and the date it was last checked. A record not re-checked within the freshness window set by the verification policy is flagged as stale rather than quietly presented as current.
Yes. The records are published under CC BY 4.0 with attribution, and are available as CSV, newline-delimited JSON and a read-only REST API that needs no key. Cite the record URL, the date accessed and the official source alongside it.
