Law / Frameworks / NIST AI RMF / Govern
NIST AI RMF, GovernGOVERN 2.3
Executive leadership of the organization takes responsibility for decisions about risks associated with AI system development and deployment.NIST AI Risk Management Framework, version 1.0, January 2023 (NIST AI 100-1), GOVERN 2.3
We read each law below as bearing on this control. That does not mean the control, done well, meets the law: what each law asks is on its own page. Law library as of .
- 9
- laws
- 7
- jurisdictions
- 0
- with court rulings behind them
- 0
- not yet in force
- 2
- proposed, not law
Related controls in other frameworks the same duties, in at least two laws we track, reach both
- NIST AI 600-1GAI-RISK-07 Human-AI Configuration, 4 laws
- NIST AI 200-22.3 Apply & Measure, 4 laws
- NIST AI 200-24.3 Composing a TEVV Toolbox, 4 laws
- OWASP LLM Top 10LLM03:2026 Excessive Agency, 4 laws
- OWASP Agentic Top 10ASI09 Human-Agent Trust Exploitation, 4 laws
- MIT mitigations1.1 Board Structure & Oversight, 4 laws
- MIT mitigations1.2 Risk Management, 4 laws
- MIT mitigations3.5 Post-deployment Monitoring, 4 laws
- 1 more in the MIT mitigations
- FINOS AIGFAIR-PREV-005 System Acceptance Testing, 4 laws
- FINOS AIGFAIR-PREV-006 Data Quality & Classification/Sensitivity, 4 laws
- FINOS AIGFAIR-PREV-024 Human-in-the-Loop Action Approval Gate, 4 laws
- 3 more in the FINOS AIGF
- ETSI EN 304 2235.1.4-1 Capability for human oversight designed in and maintained., 4 laws
- ETSI EN 304 2235.2.1-1 Full inventory of assets, including their dependencies and connections., 4 laws
- ETSI EN 304 2235.2.4-1 Developers keep an audit trail of system design and post-deployment..., 4 laws
- 1 more in the ETSI EN 304 223
A law in force is unmarked; the rest wear their state: proposed
AI sector rules
7 laws, 5 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| OSFI Guideline E-23, Enterprise-Wide Model Risk Management for Deposit-Taking Institutions (2017) |
Senior management should develop and operationalize enterprise-wide model risk management policies, and each model in use should have an owner who is clearly assigned and who keeps thorough documentation at each stage of the model's life cycle. |
|
| EBA Guidelines on loan origination and monitoring (EBA/GL/2020/06), automated models and model governance |
When using technology-enabled innovation for credit-granting purposes, institutions should capture the inherent risks in their risk management and control frameworks, commensurate with the business model, credit risk exposure, complexity of the methods and extent of use, and ensure that the management body sufficiently understands its use, limitations and impact on credit-granting procedures (paragraph 53(a) and (b)). |
|
| Michigan DIFS Bulletin 2026-03-BT/CF/CU, Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Financial Service Providers |
Your AIS Program should vest responsibility for its development, implementation, monitoring, and oversight, and for your strategy for AI Systems, with senior management accountable to the board or an appropriate committee of the board (guideline 1.3). You cannot outsource your fundamental risk management responsibility, even when a third party performs a service, and you should have clear policies and expectations for use of AI Systems, including permissible use by employees (guideline 1.10). |
|
| Guidance Note on the Consumer Protection and Responsible Adoption and Use of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning by Licensed Financial Institutions in the U.A.E. |
It reaches you if you are a licensed financial institution in the UAE, including an insurance provider (an LFI in the Guidance Note), that uses AI systems or ML technologies. The Guidance Note sets out the Central Bank's expectations and no rule of its own, so each line below states what the Central Bank says LFIs should do: adopt a documented governance framework for AI and ML that is commensurate with the size, nature and complexity of your operations, with the Board and senior management responsible and accountable for AI and ML systems and outcomes, and do not employ AI models you have no control over (Sections 2(a) and 2(b)). |
|
| Model Management Standards: governance, validation and monitoring of the models a bank uses to decide, including artificial intelligence models |
Establish a Model Oversight Committee accountable for all significant modelling decisions at each step of the model life-cycle, with the Board bearing responsibility for modelling decisions with material implications and defining your appetite for Model Risk (Sections 3.1.6 and 3.1.8(i)). Take responsibility for all modelling decisions, model outputs and related financial consequences, even if third parties are involved (Section 3.1.10). |
|
| Artificial Intelligence (AI) update |
The FCA says any use of AI in relation to an activity, business area or management function of a firm falls within the responsibilities of a Senior Management Function manager (paragraph 3.40). |
|
| Model risk management principles for banks |
Have the board approve the model risk management policy, set a model risk appetite and receive regular reports on the firm's model risk profile against it, allocate responsibility for the framework to the relevant Senior Management Function holder or holders and reflect it in their Statements of Responsibilities, document roles and responsibilities for each stage of the model lifecycle, and, for third-party vendor models, satisfy yourself that they have been validated to the same standards as your own and validate your own use of them (Principle 2). |
AI governance
1 law, 1 jurisdiction| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| Artificial Intelligence Risk Management and Security Act of 2026 proposed |
Develop, publish and follow a Model Safety Plan for each AI system or model you create, substantially modify, or use in the training or evaluation of other AI models, naming the model or system, a capabilities or risk assessment, the mitigation measures for each assessed item across the product lifecycle, and the corporate officer responsible for carrying it out |
AI transparency
1 law, 1 jurisdiction| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| Digitale Medien-Staatsvertrag Teil 2 (Discussion Draft), Rules for Providers of AI Information Systems (Proposed Sections 77a to 77g of the Medienstaatsvertrag) proposed |
Take responsibility for the content your AI information system generates. |
Full text of the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, public domain (a US government work). Every control of the framework.