On a reasoned request by a competent authority, providers must supply that authority with all the information and documentation necessary to demonstrate the conformity of the high-risk AI system with the Chapter III Section 2 requirements, in a language easily understood by the authority from among the official languages of the institutions of the Union as indicated by the Member State concerned. On a reasoned request they must also give the requesting authority access to the automatically generated logs referred to in Art.12(1), to the extent those logs are under their control. Information obtained by the authority is subject to the Art.78 confidentiality obligations.
This control maps to 12 controls across 8 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
EU AI Act EUAI-Art.21 is one control. If you already hold one of the frameworks below, a reviewed crosswalk already says how much of EU AI Act your existing evidence covers. Hold ISO/IEC 42001:2023 and 17 of 43 EU AI Act controls already carry evidence.
Each report names every control your existing framework evidences, every one it does not, the reasoning behind each claim, and the claims that were argued against and rejected. 0 were rejected on the ISO/IEC 42001:2023 pair alone.
The graph holds this control, the 12 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.