Law / Kazakhstan

Law on Artificial Intelligence, transparency and disclosure duties

Law No. 230-VIII (), Arts. 7, 21

In force since .

An AI transparency rule binding public and private bodies.

Obligation class
Content labelling, Disclosure
Audit expectation
none
Setting the rule reaches
General

What it requires

  • Give users full information about an AI system's operational characteristics and limitations, and inform a user subject to an AI-assisted decision of the automated processing, its consequences, and how to object.
  • Inform users that goods, works or services are produced or provided using an AI system.
  • Label synthetic audio, video, image or text output in machine-readable form and accompany it with a visual or other warning a user can perceive without impediment before distributing it.

These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.

In the frameworks

NIST AI RMF
  • MEASURE 2.8Risks associated with transparency and accountability – as identified in the MAP function – are examined and documented.
NIST AI 600-1
OWASP Agentic Top 10
  • ASI09Human-Agent Trust Exploitation
MIT mitigations Draft
  • 2.4Content Safety Controls
  • 4.1System Documentation
  • 4.2Risk Disclosure
  • 4.6User Rights & Recourse
FINOS AIGF
ETSI EN 304 223
  • 5.1.3-2Threats developers cannot resolve are passed to operators and on to end-users.
  • 5.3.1-1Users told where and how their data is used, accessed and stored, with developers informing operators.
  • 5.3.1-2.1That guidance covers proper use, limits and likely failure modes.

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

Identifiers refer to ETSI EN 304 223 V2.1.1 (2025-12), © ETSI 2025, all rights reserved. ETSI owns the standard; no ETSI text (titles or sentences) is reproduced here. The standard is free to download from ETSI.

What it makes you log

Logging duty

Article 7 gives a user a right to be informed of automated processing and to object, and Article 21 requires machine-readable labelling and a visible warning on synthetic output, with responsibility for informing users assigned to the system's owner or holder. Neither provision names a log, a record, an event-recording capability or an audit trail, nor does either require the owner or holder to demonstrate, prove or produce on demand something only a record could show; each is satisfied by the labelling or disclosure act itself.

Kind
None
As of

What this law does

Drafted with AI

Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page. How this site is made

Research summary

Legal information, not legal advice. This is LexLint's own research summary of a public legal source, and it creates no attorney-client relationship. For decisions that matter, consult qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. About LexLint

Article 7 requires that users be given full information about an AI system's operational characteristics and limitations so it is used for its intended purpose, and gives a user subject to a decision made with an AI system the right to be informed of the automated processing and its consequences, the possibility of objecting to it, and how to protect their rights.

Article 21 requires users to be informed that goods, works or services are produced or provided using an AI system, and permits distributing synthetic output only where it carries a machine-readable label and a visual or other warning that a user can perceive without methods that impede that perception; responsibility for informing users about synthetic output rests on the system's owner or holder.

When LexLint raises it

When your app profile says your app generates content with AI, generates text with AI, generates images with AI, generates video with AI, generates audio with AI, deploys a chatbot or makes high-risk automated decisions.

Back to the example  ·  Lint your app

Page updated .