Standing
Anyone affected can trigger review without permission gates or retaliation.
Minimum viable contestability standard
Eight commitments for challenging an automated decision: standing, reasons, records, timelines, a named responder, defined effects, remedies, no retaliation.
One-screen summary
Minimum viable contestability standard
The eight commitments, one line each. The requirements and the evidence for each follow below.
Reasons
Decisions come with plain-language reasons and what could change the outcome.
Records
A decision record exists with timestamps, owners, and a shareable receipt.
Timelines
Published review deadlines force a final response and escalation path.
Responder and standard
A named party must answer, and the register says what they decide against.
Effect
The state changes a successful challenge can produce are enumerated in advance.
Remedies
A person can reach a remedy, whether reversal, restoration, or compensation, and see when it was delivered.
Non-retaliation
People who challenge a decision cannot be punished for using the review process.
The definition, with a hypothetical case: What is AI contestability?
Baseline requirements
Eight commitments a system must meet before its decisions can be challenged
Each commitment below is the minimum, with the evidence a reviewer can check.
Section 1
Standing (who can challenge)
People affected by a decision can open review without gatekeeping.
Requirements
- Allow the person the decision is about to file a challenge without extra approvals.
- Allow trusted representatives to file with consent.
- Impose no paywalls, hidden prerequisites, or behavior tests before filing.
Evidence
- Visible challenge entry point.
- Receipt confirming submission.
- Policy stating who can file and how.
Section 2
Reasons (what happened and why)
People receive clear reasons they can act on and verify.
Requirements
- Provide a plain-language reason for the decision.
- Name the policy, data, or rule that drove the outcome.
- State what evidence or changes could reverse the decision.
Evidence
- Reason statement attached to the decision record.
- Accountable owner name and contact path.
- Versioned policy reference or rule ID.
Section 3
Records (receipts and logs)
Every decision that can be challenged leaves a traceable, shareable record.
Requirements
- Issue a decision record with a unique ID and timestamp.
- Keep the record accessible to the person the decision is about.
- Log updates, evidence, and outcomes in a repair log.
Evidence
- Decision record or receipt with unique ID.
- Accessible record history for the person the decision is about.
- Repair log or decision log entry.
Section 4
Timelines (review clocks)
Review timelines are published and enforced with escalation rules.
Requirements
- Publish the review deadline and expected response time.
- Provide status updates and escalation triggers.
- If deadlines are missed, default to human review or pause.
Evidence
- Published review deadline, with the event that starts its clock.
- Status tracker or timeline receipt.
- Escalation rule documentation.
Section 5
Responder and standard (who must answer, and against what)
A named party is obliged to answer, and the standard they decide against is published in advance.
Requirements
- Name the responder for each decision class, by role and contact, not by inbox.
- Publish the standard of review: policy conformance, policy correctness, evidentiary support, or reasonableness of outcome.
- State what evidence the responder must accept from the person challenging.
- Record the answer against the published standard, including reasoned refusals.
Evidence
- Standing register entry with responder and standard of review.
- Answered cases showing the standard applied.
- Admissible evidence list published with the challenge path.
Section 6
Effect (what can change)
The state transitions a successful challenge can produce are enumerated before anyone files.
Requirements
- List the possible outcomes: the decision stands, is narrowed, suspended, reversed, or corrected.
- Say which outcomes reach the delegation behind the decision, not only the decision itself.
- Show at least one closed case for each transition the list claims is available.
Evidence
- Enumerated state transitions in the standing register entry.
- Outcome log mapping closed challenges to transitions.
- Reconsideration records for challenges that changed a grant.
Section 7
Remedies (reversal and repair)
A person can reach a remedy, whether reversal, restoration, or compensation, and can see when it was delivered.
Requirements
- Offer a clear path to reversal and restoration.
- List any compensation or remedy options.
- Show proof that remedy was delivered once complete.
Evidence
- Remedy options published with the decision record.
- Completion receipt for remedy actions.
- Decision log entry recording the reversal and the restoration.
Section 8
Non-retaliation (safe to challenge)
People are protected from penalties for challenging decisions.
Requirements
- State a no-retaliation guarantee in the challenge flow.
- Prohibit increased friction, fees, or access loss after filing.
- Track any adverse treatment of people who filed, and reverse it as soon as it is found.
Evidence
- Non-retaliation policy statement.
- Monitoring note for adverse impacts.
- Contact path for reporting retaliation.