Public purpose

Why A.I.R.A. exists: human control of AI

A.I.R.A. promotes accountability through clear operator responsibilities, independent review and accessible public information. When AI systems act independently, a person remains responsible for their operation.

Human control of AI: an evidence archive of files, tape reels, maps, and a monitored signal
Evidence archive · Custody records and monitored materialPhotograph: A.I.R.A. Public Information Office

Human responsibility for AI systems

Who controls AI agents? And who remains responsible when an agent acts across sensitive information and human decisions?

Operators remain responsible for AI activity that affects access, information or decisions. They should maintain records that allow this activity to be reviewed.

A.I.R.A. publishes operator guidance, receives reports of concerns and makes incident findings available to the public.

Who can stop it?Who can inspect it?Who answers for it?

How oversight is demonstrated

Oversight relies on documented responsibilities and evidence of system activity, alongside operational status information.

System status

Status indicators describe system operation. They do not replace activity records, current access controls or independent review.

Information to request from operators

  • Ask who approved the domain, and when its agents were last updated.
  • Ask who can halt it.
  • Ask what the agents can reach.
  • Ask what evidence is kept.
  • Ask who reviews changes and corrections to the record.

The evidence standard for human control of AI

Published findings should identify their sources, review dates and correction history. Operators should be able to demonstrate who is authorised to intervene and how system activity can be inspected.

Attributable sources

Findings identify the evidence used in review.

Visible review dates

Records show when they were last reviewed, not just when they were written.

Correction history

Changes stay beside the original entry, with the reason logged.

Proven intervention

Records document a person’s authority and ability to pause the system.

A sealed data drive held in a foam-lined evidence case
Evidence Custody · Recovered material

The public interest

AI systems can support research and public services. Oversight helps people understand their use, raise concerns and review how incidents are handled.

Responsibility remains with the named operator throughout system operation and incident review.

Documents

Publication historyAIRA-PI-2026-0104
StageOfficeDateSignature
PreparedPublic Information OfficeSigned electronically
Approved for releaseRecords Officer, Public Information OfficeSigned electronically
Last independent reviewIndependent reviewer, recordsSigned electronically

Use the document reference when citing this publication. Previous versions remain available with the correction history.

Was this page helpful?

Page last reviewed Content owner: Public Information Office

Next in the public record

AI Governance and Oversight

What a domain must keep, the three roles that must exist, and how a report becomes a public account.

Continue reading