Accountability Obligation (s 11)
Is this legally binding?
Binding. Binding law. It applies to everyone in scope, whether or not anyone points at it.
Organisations are responsible for personal data in their possession or control and must consider what a reasonable person would consider appropriate in the circumstances when meeting PDPA responsibilities.
From the source
“An organisation is responsible for personal data in its possession or under its control.”
s 11(1)-(2)
What this connects to
3 relations. Official relations are the ones the source documents state; anything marked GAGE analysis is our reading, not an agency's.
Contains2
- ObligationAccountability and Written Policies for AI SystemsGuidance
Guideline interprets binding PDPA provision; guideline itself is not legally binding
- ObligationSystem Deployer Primary ResponsibilityConsultation
Guideline interprets binding PDPA provision; guideline itself is not legally binding
Cited by1
- SectionPart 3, General Rules on Protection of and Accountability for Personal DataBinding
Structural decomposition of the source instrument
Learn this properly
This page tells you what Accountability Obligation (s 11) 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.