Law / Frameworks / NIST AI RMF / Map
NIST AI RMF, MapMAP 5.1
Likelihood and magnitude of each identified impact (both potentially beneficial and harmful) based on expected use, past uses of AI systems in similar contexts, public incident reports, feedback from those external to the team that developed or deployed the AI system, or other data are identified and documented.NIST AI Risk Management Framework, version 1.0, January 2023 (NIST AI 100-1), MAP 5.1
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 .
- 22
- laws
- 18
- jurisdictions
- 0
- with court rulings behind them
- 2
- not yet in force
- 8
- 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-04 Data Privacy, 10 laws
- NIST AI 600-1GAI-RISK-07 Human-AI Configuration, 3 laws
- NIST AI 200-22.4 Synthesize & Interrogate, 10 laws
- NIST AI 200-22.3 Apply & Measure, 3 laws
- NIST AI 200-24.3 Composing a TEVV Toolbox, 3 laws
- OWASP LLM Top 10LLM03:2026 Excessive Agency, 3 laws
- OWASP Agentic Top 10ASI09 Human-Agent Trust Exploitation, 3 laws
- MIT mitigations1.2 Risk Management, 12 laws
- MIT mitigations1.7 Societal Impact Assessment, 10 laws
- MIT mitigations3.1 Testing & Auditing, 10 laws
- 3 more in the MIT mitigations
- NIST Privacy FrameworkID.RA-P4 Problematic data actions, likelihoods, and impacts are used to determine and..., 3 laws
- FINOS AIGFAIR-PREV-005 System Acceptance Testing, 15 laws
- FINOS AIGFAIR-PREV-006 Data Quality & Classification/Sensitivity, 3 laws
- FINOS AIGFAIR-PREV-024 Human-in-the-Loop Action Approval Gate, 3 laws
- 3 more in the FINOS AIGF
- ETSI EN 304 2235.1.2-1 Business need and security risks written down and assessed before deciding..., 10 laws
- ETSI EN 304 2235.1.3-1 Threat modelling and risk management, reviewed regularly and covering..., 10 laws
- ETSI EN 304 2235.1.4-1 Capability for human oversight designed in and maintained., 3 laws
- 3 more in the ETSI EN 304 223
A law in force is unmarked; the rest wear their state: not yet in force proposed
AI governance
8 laws, 8 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, signed by Andorra proposed |
Each Party must adopt or maintain measures for the identification, assessment, prevention and mitigation of risks posed by AI systems, considering their actual and potential impacts on human rights, democracy and the rule of law, and apply those measures iteratively throughout the activities within an AI system's lifecycle; an app operator is reached through the measures its Party adopts. |
|
| Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, signed by Armenia proposed |
Each Party must adopt or maintain measures for the identification, assessment, prevention and mitigation of risks posed by AI systems, considering their actual and potential impacts on human rights, democracy and the rule of law, and apply those measures iteratively throughout the activities within an AI system's lifecycle; an app operator is reached through the measures its Party adopts. |
|
| Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, signed by Canada proposed |
Each Party must adopt or maintain measures for the identification, assessment, prevention and mitigation of risks posed by AI systems, considering their actual and potential impacts on human rights, democracy and the rule of law; an app operator is reached through the measures its Party adopts. |
|
| AI Act, Article 55 (obligations for providers of general-purpose AI models with systemic risk) |
Assess and mitigate the systemic risks your model may pose at Union level, including where those risks originate, whether in the model's development, its placing on the market, or its use. |
|
| Gesetz zur Marktüberwachung und Innovationsförderung von künstlicher Intelligenz (KI-MIG), AI Market Surveillance and Innovation Promotion Act |
Provide the information or documentation, and give the access, that Article 21 requires of a provider of a high-risk AI system when a competent authority asks; carry out and update the fundamental rights impact assessment Article 27 requires and send the notification it requires; if you are a notified body, inform the notifying authority as Article 45 requires; and, if you operate a high-risk AI system under point 1, 3, 4 or 5 of Annex III, give an affected person the explanation Article 86 requires (Section 15). |
|
| Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, signed by Moldova proposed |
Each Party to the Convention must adopt or maintain measures for the identification, assessment, prevention and mitigation of risks posed by artificial intelligence systems, considering their actual and potential impacts on human rights, democracy and the rule of law (Article 16(1)). |
|
| AI Framework Act, Article 32 (safety-assurance duty for high-compute AI systems) |
If your AI system was trained using cumulative compute of 10^26 floating-point operations or more, applies the most advanced AI technology currently in use, and could broadly and seriously affect people's life, physical safety or fundamental rights, identify, assess and mitigate risk across the system's full life cycle. |
|
| Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, signed by the United Kingdom proposed |
Each Party to the Convention must adopt or maintain measures for the identification, assessment, prevention and mitigation of risks posed by artificial intelligence systems, considering their actual and potential impacts on human rights, democracy and the rule of law (Article 16(1)). |
AI risk obligations
7 laws, 6 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| AI Act, Article 27 (fundamental rights impact assessment) from , in 13 months |
If you are a body governed by public law, a private entity providing a public service, or a deployer of a credit-scoring or life-and-health-insurance-risk-pricing high-risk AI system (Annex III points 5(b) or (c)), assess the impact on fundamental rights of a high-risk AI system before its first use, unless the system is the Annex III point 2 critical-infrastructure use case. Update the assessment if any of those elements changes during use, rather than treating it as a one-time exercise. |
|
| AI Act, Article 9 (risk management system) from , in 13 months |
Identify and analyze the known and reasonably foreseeable risks the system can pose to health, safety, or fundamental rights under its intended use, and estimate and evaluate risks that may emerge under intended use and reasonably foreseeable misuse. Consider whether the system is likely to adversely affect persons under 18 or other vulnerable groups, given its intended purpose, when implementing your risk management system. |
|
| Council of Europe Framework Convention on AI, Georgia's signature proposed |
Carry out iterative risk and impact assessments of an AI system's actual and potential impacts on human rights, democracy, and the rule of law, with sufficient prevention and mitigation measures. |
|
| Decreto Legislativo 160/2026, After-the-Fact Facial Recognition Integrated in Video Surveillance (Art. 10) |
As controller, the Ministry of the Interior must carry out the data-protection impact assessment beforehand and consult the Garante (art. 10, comma 6). |
|
| Artificial Intelligence Bill, 2026, high-risk system obligations proposed |
Conduct a risk assessment and a human-rights impact assessment before deploying a high-risk system, and maintain human oversight of it. |
|
| Digital Code, Chapter 23: AI system design and risk-management obligations |
An app whose AI system a hazard assessment finds poses increased danger to life, health, rights, the environment, defense, national security or public order must have its owner reassess that hazard at each design, development, deployment and material-change stage, and publish the assessment and its methodology on the owner's own website as open data. |
|
| AI-based electronic monitoring and automated employment decision systems in employment and public services (S4075 / A4981) proposed |
Do not use an electronic monitoring tool, an automated employment decision system, or an automated benefit or service decision system until an impact assessment has screened it and an independent auditor or, for governmental use, the Department of Labor and Workforce Development has approved it as compliant. |
AI prohibited practices
2 laws, 2 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| Commission Guidelines on prohibited AI practices under the AI Act (C(2025) 5052 final) |
Where national law permits real-time remote biometric identification for law enforcement under an Article 5(1)(h) exception, do not use the system until a fundamental rights impact assessment has been completed and the competent judicial or independent administrative authority has authorized the use, except in a duly justified urgent case; register the system in the EU database, without undue delay in a justified emergency; and notify each use to the market surveillance authority and the national data protection authority (Section 10, paragraphs 377, 380, 382, 383 and 409). |
|
| Decreto Legislativo 160/2026, Police Biometric AI: Dataset Labelling and Real-Time Remote Identification (Artt. 7-9, 13) |
Before use, complete a fundamental-rights impact assessment under Article 27 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 and the data-protection impact assessment under Decreto Legislativo 51/2018 (art. 9, comma 1). |
AI sector rules
2 laws, 2 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| Labour Act, Articles 221.g to 221.i, Algorithmic Management of Work Through Digital Labour Platforms |
Assess the risks of platform work to workers' safety and health, and do not allow a work intensity that endangers a worker's physical or mental health (Article 221.h(1) and (2)). |
|
| Central Bank of Jordan Artificial Intelligence Framework for the Banking Sector, Version 1.0 |
The CBJ expects you to review and validate AI data, models and decisions to detect and mitigate bias, to conduct periodic AI Impact Assessments proportional to risk, to validate and robustness-test models, and to monitor AI performance continuously at a level matched to the use case and risk (sections 2.5, 2.6, 5.2 and 5.3). |
Comprehensive regime
2 laws, 2 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| Superintendencia Circular on AI and Personal Data |
Complete and document a privacy impact assessment before an artificial intelligence system likely to pose a high risk to data subjects processes their personal data, covering the processing operations, a risk evaluation, and the measures planned to prevent the risks identified. |
|
| DPC Guidance: AI, Large Language Models and Data Protection |
Perform a data protection impact assessment before training or deploying an AI system on personal data of people in Ireland where the processing is new to you, combines data sets, or may involve minors or vulnerable people. |
Data subject rights
1 law, 1 jurisdiction| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| SPDP Norma General guaranteeing personal-data protection in the use of AI systems |
Before developing an AI system that will process personal data, carry out a risk-management process and, where applicable, an impact assessment. |
Full text of the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, public domain (a US government work). Every control of the framework.