EU AI Act Art.86: Right to explanation of individual decision-making

Article 86 of the EU AI Act binds the operator (see the article). It requires A deployer must, at the request of an affected person who has been subject to a decision the deployer took. This page states what it requires, who it binds and the evidence to keep. Browsing is free; the conformance kit is USD 499.

Specifics

Instrument	Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (the EU AI Act), as amended by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744
Article	Art.86
Binds	Operator (see the article)
Group	Post-Market Monitoring, Market Surveillance and Rights
Evidence items	5
Linked NIST AI RMF controls	2
Linked ISO/IEC 42001 controls	1
Last updated	2026-10-16

Who does Art.86 bind?

The article binds the operator (see the article). The Act places each duty on a named party in the value chain, so a system can carry a provider duty and a deployer duty at once. Confirm your own position against the text; this page names the party, it does not rule on your facts.

Applies with the high-risk regime: 2 December 2027 for stand-alone systems listed in Annex III, and 2 August 2028 for AI embedded in regulated products listed in Annex I (Article 113, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744). See the full timeline.

What does Art.86 require?

A deployer must, at the request of an affected person who has been subject to a decision the deployer took on the basis of the output of an Annex III high-risk AI system other than one listed under Annex III point 2, and which produces legal effects or similarly significantly affects that person in a way they consider to have an adverse impact on their health, safety or fundamental rights, provide clear and meaningful explanations of the role of the AI system in the decision-making procedure and of the main elements of the decision taken. The duty does not apply where Union or national law provides an exception or restriction, and applies only to the extent the right is not otherwise provided for under Union law.

This is our plain-language statement of the article, not the text of the regulation. Read the article: Art.86 (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 on EUR-Lex).

What evidence should we keep for Art.86?

Category	Evidence to keep
Right to explanation	A documented procedure for receiving and answering explanation requests, with an owner and a response time
Right to explanation	Explanation templates per decision type, covering both the role of the AI system in the procedure and the main elements of the decision
Right to explanation	A register of requests received and the explanations given
Right to explanation	An analysis of which deployed systems fall within Art.86, including which decisions produce legal or similarly significant effects
Right to explanation	The recorded assessment of any Union or national law exception relied on, and of any overlap with a right already provided elsewhere in Union law

What does a linked control mean here?

A linked control is a NIST AI RMF or ISO/IEC 42001 control that the held rule set records as a topical match, with a confidence and a one-line reason. It does not establish that meeting one requirement satisfies the other, it is not legal advice, and it is not certification. Where no control is recorded, the page says so and does not guess. Sources: the NIST AI RMF and ISO/IEC 42001.

Which NIST AI RMF controls line up with Art.86?

2 controls in the held rule set is recorded as a topical match for this obligation, each with its confidence and reason.

Control	NIST AI RMF	Confidence
`AIRMF-MS-2.9`	The AI model is explained, validated, and documented, and AI system output is interpreted within its context as identified in the MAP function and to inform responsible use and governance Clear and meaningful explanation of the system's role and the main elements of the decision, to the affected person.	high
`AIRMF-MS-3.3`	Feedback processes for end users and impacted communities to report problems and appeal system outcomes are established and integrated into AI system evaluation metrics The affected person's right to request and receive an explanation is the end-user reporting route.	high

Which ISO/IEC 42001 controls line up with Art.86?

1 control in the held rule set is recorded as a topical match for this obligation, each with its confidence and reason.

Control	ISO/IEC 42001	Confidence
`A.8.5`	Information for interested parties Affected persons get explanation of the system's role in a decision.	medium

What does the conformance kit add for Art.86?

The kit renders this obligation into your own role checklist with the evidence register, the linked controls and a CSV export, for USD 499 one off. See what is in the kit or open it.