Skip to main content
Praxikon
All answers

Direct answer

What obligations does the deployer have under Article 86 of the AI Act?

Your question is about Article 86: right to an explanation of a decision. That obligation applies today. Whether your system actually falls under it depends on conditions you assess yourself.

You determine this yourself

  • Applies where a deployer takes a decision about a natural person on the basis of the output of a high-risk AI system listed in Annex III, with the exception of point 2 of that Annex, and that decision 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.
  • Paragraph 2 excludes the right for AI systems where exceptions from, or restrictions to, that obligation follow from Union or national law in compliance with Union law. Paragraph 3 further limits the right to cases where it is not otherwise provided for under Union law, which makes the boundary with Article 22 GDPR a case-by-case question.

First step: Set up how you handle a request for an explanation.

Article 86 of the AI Act covers right to an explanation of a decision. A person affected by a decision that a deployer takes on the basis of the output of a high-risk AI system listed in Annex III may request an explanation of the role of that system in the decision-making procedure and of the main elements of the decision taken. The duty sits with the deployer. This obligation has applied since 2 August 2026.

The conclusion and your first steps

This applies now

Your first actions

  1. Set up how you handle a request for an explanation. Ensure your complaints or objections desk recognises a request for an explanation of an AI-supported decision, that it can be traced per decision which system in which version contributed to it, and that someone is designated to give the explanation.
Read the official sourceChecked on

General interpretation, not legal advice. Checked against Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 and the Digital Omnibus (EU) 2026/1744; the official source remains authoritative.

Full map for your situation

Source and locator

Every statement above rests on these texts. The locator points to the place in the text, the version and the date say which edition was checked.

  • EU Artificial Intelligence Act 2024/1689

    European Parliament and Council, version original-oj-2024-07-12, checked on , ELI http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj

    Locators in this source

    • Article 86(1)-(3)

Dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0, schema 1.4.0.

Execution

Embed this obligation in policy, process and ownership

A legal action only works when it is clear who performs it, where the evidence sits and when it is reviewed. Embed AI translates this obligation into working agreements, controls and ownership per system. The source interpretation above is separate from this commercial referral by Praxikon to an affiliated brand.

See the governance approach
Does this answer your question?
Zahed Ashkara, lawyer and AI governance specialist

Expert behind this page

Zahed Ashkara

Lawyer and AI governance specialist