About this site
An independent reference to the EU AI Act, published by a company that sells AI governance documentation. That is a conflict worth stating plainly rather than burying, so this page states it.
Why this exists
HumanAudit builds audit-ready AI governance documentation, checklists, classification matrices, impact assessment templates, statements of applicability, gap-analysis workbooks. To do that we have to keep an accurate, current reading of the Regulation. This site is that reading, published.
It is not a marketing brochure with legal text on it, and it is not a neutral academic resource. It is the working reference of a company that has to be right for its own delivery work, made public because an accurate public reference is a better argument for our competence than a brochure would be.
Who writes it
Akshay Dubey, founder of HumanAudit Inc. Background in B2B go-to-market and operations rather than in law. Not a lawyer, and the site says so on every page.
What we do not claim
We do not claim legal qualification. Nothing here is legal advice.
We do not claim expert review that has not happened. Where a page has been reviewed by a named qualified reviewer, that person is named on the page with their qualification. Where no such line appears, no such review has taken place. We will not describe an unnamed “team of experts” or “panel of reviewers”.
We do not claim affiliation. Independent of the European Commission, the AI Office, CEN, CENELEC, ISO and every EU institution.
We do not reproduce standards. ISO, IEC and CEN standards are copyright of their respective bodies. We describe what requirements ask for; we do not reproduce them.
How this is funded
HumanAudit sells AI governance documentation through iso42001toolkit.com and works directly with organisations and advisory firms. This site links to both where relevant and says so.
Where our commercial interest and the accurate answer diverge, we publish the accurate answer. Examples currently on this site:
- ISO/IEC 42001 does not satisfy the EU AI Act, and CEN-CENELEC assessed exactly that question and wrote a different standard. Here →
- Certification may be premature for organisations with no EU exposure and no enterprise customers asking. Here →
- Conformity assessment cannot be automated or outsourced, including to us. Here →
- Our own classifier routes prohibited-practice answers to take legal advice, not to a product. Here →
- We publish that templates are sometimes the wrong purchase: certification guidance is blunt that pre-written documents with your name dropped in will not satisfy an experienced auditor. Buy them if you have the expertise and the weeks; book a call if a deal is blocked.
We do not collect leads here
No forms, no email gates, no newsletter capture, and no analytics beyond page and click measurement. Every tool on this site: the classifier, the Annex III check, the checklist, the FRIA structure — runs in your browser and transmits nothing.
If you want to talk to us, the booking link is on every page. That is a deliberate design choice: a reference that harvests contact details in exchange for its own content is not really a reference.
How it is maintained
- Every page carries a review date and a next review date.
- Legal claims carry a provenance chip naming the article and instrument.
- Claims are labelled verified fact, expert analysis, practical recommendation or unsettled.
- Corrections are published, not silent. We have already issued one, on the development stage of EN 18286.
- A page that cannot be kept current is retired with a 410, not left standing. We retired our own August 2026 countdown article on that basis.
Sister properties
iso42001toolkit.com — ISO/IEC 42001 documentation and toolkits.
nhigovernance.com — non-human identity governance, free and vendor-neutral.
HumanAudit Inc., 1111B S Governors Ave, STE 47918, Dover, DE 19904, USA.
Corrections are the most useful thing you can send us
A reference is only worth what its error rate makes it worth. If a date has moved, a standard has been published, or a reading is wrong, we would rather hear it from you than lose a reader quietly.
Not sure where you sit?
The classifier maps your system against Articles 5, 6, 50 and Annex III. Twelve questions, no email.