OVERSIGHT & CONTROLS
Where does human oversight sit in your AI system, and who holds it?
Current as of July 2026.
A model answer
Human oversight is designed into the system rather than added around it. For [system], the oversight point is [where], held by [named role]. The reviewer has the authority and the information to reach a different outcome from the system's output, not merely to approve it. Override rates are monitored: a review that never departs from the system's recommendation is evidence of a rubber stamp, not of oversight. The oversight design is documented and the records are retained.
Evidence a buyer expects
A named role, a defined intervention point, and evidence that the reviewer actually exercises judgement — override statistics, or records of departures from the system's output.
Why weak answers fail
"A human reviews all decisions" without authority, information or capacity is the rubber-stamp trap, and it satisfies neither a reviewer nor GDPR Article 22. Regulators and buyers both test whether the human can genuinely decide otherwise.
What Hael produces
Hael's Human Oversight Plan (EU AI Act Article 14): the operational oversight measures, the named owner, and the records that evidence the oversight actually operates.
Related questions
Current as of July 2026. General information, not legal advice.
Keep reading
More from the answer library.
OVERSIGHT & CONTROLS
How do you test for bias, and what did the testing find?
Read answer →
CERTIFICATION & FRAMEWORKSHas your AI system been classified under the EU AI Act, and what obligations apply?
Read answer →
SUPPLY CHAIN & INCIDENTSWhat happens when your AI system behaves incorrectly or causes harm?
Read answer →