AI Act Art. 14: mandates as an oversight instrument
Last updated: · Leutrim Miftaraj
Art. 14 of the AI Act requires effective human oversight of high-risk systems; Art. 26 places obligations on deployers, Arts. 12/19 require record-keeping. Mandates are not compliance documentation about oversight — they are the oversight, as a mechanism.
The mapping
Defined authority (the mandate itself) = limits of autonomy; escalation above a threshold = human decision where it matters; kill switch = ability to intervene at any time; evidence = complete records. Four duties, four mechanisms, one system.
Deployer perspective
Whoever operates agents with mandates answers the authority's oversight question with an export instead of a project: here are the limits, here the interventions, here the history — machine-readable.
Relation to governance tools
Internal agent discovery (Okta, AgentryGov) inventories; mandates authorise and prove externally. The complete control path is the combination — observing plus authorising.
Key takeaway
The AI Act asks: who oversees the machine? The mandate answers: documented, enforced, revocable at any time.
Try it yourself
Issue your first agent mandate and check your first decision with its receipt — free, in a few minutes.