GabonLaw No. 025/2023, automated decisions and profiling
Loi n°025/2023, articles 66 à 69 (automated individual decisions)
archived copy
Read from a public archive copy, not the publisher directly. The publisher does not serve this page to automated readers, so a direct fetch was not an option here; how we access sources. Archived 2025. Publisher's page: https://journal-officiel.ga/20085-025-2023-/In force since .
A data subject rights rule binding public and private bodies.
- Obligation class
- Data subject rights
- Audit expectation
- none
What it requires
- Do not subject a person to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, without letting them oppose it.
- Where you make such a decision, implement appropriate measures to safeguard the person's rights, freedoms and legitimate interests, including at least their right to obtain human intervention, express their point of view, and contest the decision.
These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.
In the frameworks
- NIST AI RMF
- MAP 3.5Processes for human oversight are defined, assessed, and documented in accordance with organizational policies from the GOVERN function.
- MEASURE 3.3Feedback processes for end users and impacted communities to report problems and appeal system outcomes are established and integrated into AI system evaluation metrics.
- NIST Privacy Framework
- CT.PO-P3Policies, processes, and procedures for enabling individuals’ data processing preferences and requests are established and in place.
- FINOS AIGF
- AIR-PREV-006Data Quality & Classification/Sensitivity
- AIR-DET-021Agent Decision Audit and Explainability
Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law
What record it asks for
Logging duty
Articles 66 to 69 give the data subject the right to object to a decision based exclusively on automated processing, with the contract and explicit-consent exceptions, safeguards including human intervention and the right to contest, and a bar on relying on special categories. None of them states a duty to keep a log or record of the automated decisions. The row cites no scope clause, so the territorial hook is empty.
- Kind
- None
- As of
What this law does
Sous-section 6 (Articles 66 to 69) gives a data subject the right to object to a decision based exclusively on automated processing, including profiling, that produces legal effects for them or significantly or similarly affects them. That right does not apply where the decision is necessary to conclude or perform a contract with the controller, or rests on the person's explicit consent.
Where the decision is made, the controller must implement appropriate safeguards for the person's rights, freedoms and legitimate interests, including at least the right to obtain human intervention, express a point of view, and contest the decision. The decision may not rest on special categories of personal data unless a ground for processing that data applies and appropriate safeguards are in place.
When LexLint raises it
When your app profile says your app makes high-risk automated decisions.
Back to the example · Lint your app
Page updated .