Skip to main content
Praxikon
Comparisons

Comparison

Article 14 versus Article 26: enabling oversight and assigning oversight

The difference

Article 14 places on the provider the duty to make human oversight possible in the design of the system, including the means to intervene. Article 26 places on the deployer the duty to actually assign that oversight, to people with the authority and the competence to use those means.

The official source remains authoritative. This is general interpretation and not legal advice about your situation.

The fields side by side

Every row comes from the objects themselves. Where a field is empty, it says so; we do not fill in an assumption where the source is silent.

Status

Article 14, enabling
Upcoming
Article 26, assigning
Upcoming

Applies from

Article 14, enabling
2 December 2027
Article 26, assigning
2 December 2027

Who carries the duty

Article 14, enabling
Provider of an AI system
Article 26, assigning
Deployer, Body governed by public law

Who is affected

Article 14, enabling
Deployer
Article 26, assigning
Not recorded

Who supervises

Article 14, enabling
Not recorded
Article 26, assigning
Market surveillance authority

When this applies

Article 14, enabling
The system is high-risk; the provider builds in oversight measures, the deployer assigns oversight to competent persons.
Article 26, assigning
Applies as soon as you use a high-risk AI system under your own authority (Article 3(4)), whether you built it yourself or procured it. For the standalone Annex III route (Article 6(2)) the date is 2 December 2027; for the embedded Annex I route (Article 6(1)) the date is 2 August 2028.

Exceptions

Article 14, enabling
For remote biometric identification the reinforced requirement of verification by at least two authorised persons applies (Article 14(5)), with the exceptions listed there.
Article 26, assigning
Article 2(10) excludes natural persons using an AI system in the course of a purely personal, non-professional activity. For deployers that are financial institutions subject to internal governance requirements under Union financial services law, the monitoring obligation in paragraph 5 is deemed fulfilled by complying with those rules, and the logs under paragraph 6 are maintained as part of the documentation kept under that law.

First actions

Article 14, enabling
Design and assign effective human oversight
Article 26, assigning
Assign human oversight and give those people a mandate

Evidence that belongs with it

Article 14, enabling
Oversight file per system
Article 26, assigning
Deployment dossier: logs, worker information and information to affected persons

Control

Article 14, enabling
Oversight test before go-live
Article 26, assigning
Suspension and incident notification control

Version and review status

Article 14, enabling
v1.0.0, placed against the official source
Article 26, assigning
v1.0.0, placed against the official source
Article 14: human oversightArticle 26: obligations of deployers of high-risk AI systems

Official sources and locators

Per side, the provisions the statements above rest on.

Article 14, enabling

Article 26, assigning

Referring to these two objects

Each side has its own stable identifier, version and hash. Take them separately; you cite a comparison by citing the two objects.

Referring to this object

Citation block

Copy this reference into your advice, article or file. The identifier, the version and the hash keep the statement findable later, even once the dataset has moved on.

Reference

Praxikon, "Article 14: human oversight",
praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-14-human-oversight@1.0.0,
dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0 (schema 1.4.0),
effective_at 2026-07-27T00:00:00.000Z, known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z,
sha256 02da6ce26c5036d2cdea0842564e14a1227cd8f8e5fe5e67e15b52cd5332f98b,
https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/article-14-human-oversight
(https://www.praxikon.com/api/v1/obligations?id=praxikon%3Aeu%3Aai-act%3Aobligation%3Aarticle-14-human-oversight&effective_at=2026-07-27&known_at=2026-08-08&lang=en, accessed 2026-08-24)

Short form

praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-14-human-oversight@1.0.0 (sha256 02da6ce2)

BibTeX

@misc{praxikon-eu-ai-act-obligation-article-14-human-oversight-1-0-0,
  author       = {{Praxikon}},
  title        = {Article 14: human oversight},
  year         = {2026},
  version      = {1.0.0},
  number       = {praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-14-human-oversight},
  howpublished = {AI Act Change \& Evidence Graph, dataset 2.1.0, schema 1.4.0},
  note         = {effective_at 2026-07-27T00:00:00.000Z; known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; sha256 02da6ce26c5036d2cdea0842564e14a1227cd8f8e5fe5e67e15b52cd5332f98b},
  url          = {https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/article-14-human-oversight},
  urldate      = {2026-08-24},
  language     = {en}
}

CSL JSON

[
  {
    "id": "praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-14-human-oversight@1.0.0",
    "type": "dataset",
    "title": "Article 14: human oversight",
    "container-title": "AI Act Change & Evidence Graph",
    "publisher": "Praxikon",
    "version": "1.0.0",
    "number": "praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-14-human-oversight",
    "URL": "https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/article-14-human-oversight",
    "language": "en",
    "issued": {
      "date-parts": [
        [
          2026,
          8,
          8
        ]
      ]
    },
    "accessed": {
      "date-parts": [
        [
          2026,
          8,
          24
        ]
      ]
    },
    "note": "dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0; schema 1.4.0; effective_at 2026-07-27T00:00:00.000Z; known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; sha256 02da6ce26c5036d2cdea0842564e14a1227cd8f8e5fe5e67e15b52cd5332f98b; retrieved_from https://www.praxikon.com/api/v1/obligations?id=praxikon%3Aeu%3Aai-act%3Aobligation%3Aarticle-14-human-oversight&effective_at=2026-07-27&known_at=2026-08-08&lang=en; licence https://www.praxikon.com/nl/legal/terms"
  }
]

How to verify a reference later is set out in the methodology. Terms

Referring to this object

Citation block

Copy this reference into your advice, article or file. The identifier, the version and the hash keep the statement findable later, even once the dataset has moved on.

Reference

Praxikon, "Article 26: obligations of deployers of high-risk AI systems",
praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-26-deployer-obligations@1.0.0,
dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0 (schema 1.4.0),
effective_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z, known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z,
sha256 0269a6f883187fb177f26dc8563b035927e5d2ae021e35254c98fce04d637f0c,
https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/article-26-deployer-obligations
(https://www.praxikon.com/api/v1/obligations?id=praxikon%3Aeu%3Aai-act%3Aobligation%3Aarticle-26-deployer-obligations&effective_at=2026-08-08&known_at=2026-08-08&lang=en, accessed 2026-08-24)

Short form

praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-26-deployer-obligations@1.0.0 (sha256 0269a6f8)

BibTeX

@misc{praxikon-eu-ai-act-obligation-article-26-deployer-obligations-1-0-0,
  author       = {{Praxikon}},
  title        = {Article 26: obligations of deployers of high-risk AI systems},
  year         = {2026},
  version      = {1.0.0},
  number       = {praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-26-deployer-obligations},
  howpublished = {AI Act Change \& Evidence Graph, dataset 2.1.0, schema 1.4.0},
  note         = {effective_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; sha256 0269a6f883187fb177f26dc8563b035927e5d2ae021e35254c98fce04d637f0c},
  url          = {https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/article-26-deployer-obligations},
  urldate      = {2026-08-24},
  language     = {en}
}

CSL JSON

[
  {
    "id": "praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-26-deployer-obligations@1.0.0",
    "type": "dataset",
    "title": "Article 26: obligations of deployers of high-risk AI systems",
    "container-title": "AI Act Change & Evidence Graph",
    "publisher": "Praxikon",
    "version": "1.0.0",
    "number": "praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-26-deployer-obligations",
    "URL": "https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/article-26-deployer-obligations",
    "language": "en",
    "issued": {
      "date-parts": [
        [
          2026,
          8,
          8
        ]
      ]
    },
    "accessed": {
      "date-parts": [
        [
          2026,
          8,
          24
        ]
      ]
    },
    "note": "dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0; schema 1.4.0; effective_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; sha256 0269a6f883187fb177f26dc8563b035927e5d2ae021e35254c98fce04d637f0c; retrieved_from https://www.praxikon.com/api/v1/obligations?id=praxikon%3Aeu%3Aai-act%3Aobligation%3Aarticle-26-deployer-obligations&effective_at=2026-08-08&known_at=2026-08-08&lang=en; licence https://www.praxikon.com/nl/legal/terms"
  }
]

How to verify a reference later is set out in the methodology. Terms

Execution

Assign human oversight to an identifiable person

Oversight that a design makes possible but that nobody in the organisation carries is not demonstrable. Praxikon does not carry that out; Embed AI assigns the role, the authority to intervene and the record of both, per system.

See the Embed AI approach

Other comparisons

Unsure about your role itself rather than the duties that come with it? Work out whether you are a provider or a deployer