Principle 1: Transparency and Explainability
Is this legally binding?
Guidance. Voluntary guidance. Best practice, not obligation, until a contract or a regulator cites it.
AI systems should be transparent and explainable so users and affected individuals can understand how AI-driven decisions are made, to the extent feasible and appropriate to risk.
What this connects to
2 relations. Official relations are the ones the source documents state; anything marked GAGE analysis is our reading, not an agency's.
Maps across to2
- External frameworkArticle 26: Obligations of deployersBindingGAGE analysis, not official
Transparency principle anticipates deployer transparency duties
- External frameworkFunction: GOVERNGuidanceGAGE analysis, not official
Transparency norms are embedded through GOVERN policies
Learn this properly
This page tells you what Principle 1: Transparency and Explainability is and whether it binds you. The AI Governance program teaches the whole discipline, with dedicated coverage of the Singapore governance stack and the MAS regime, and every topic is passed by explaining it back in your own words, graded against the source.
See the AI Governance programVerified against the official source on 2026-08-17. GAGE is not affiliated with or endorsed by any agency named here, and nothing on this page is legal advice. How this is built and checked.
Readers of this also ask
GAGE briefings tell you which AI regulation deadlines are coming, what they actually require of you, and when a program opens.