{"_note":"Representative sample oversight ledger from IRP Compliance. Each line is one append-only human-control event captured by IRP (Intent Record Protocol). Records illustrate the structure of documented human oversight under EU AI Act Art. 14. This is a sanitised sample, not production customer data. Inspect the open protocol at https://github.com/S0tman/irp-capture"}
{"id":"IRP-2026-06-03-003","timestamp":"2026-06-03T16:40:00Z","source":"classification","type":"oversight_event","ai_proposed":null,"human_action":"classified","human_decision":"IRP Compliance's own AI features classified as limited-risk, not Annex III high-risk","confirmed_by":"Johan Lopes Helgesson","rationale":"Features assist compliance preparation and make no automated decisions about individuals; no Annex III category applies. No FRIA is required for our own deployer use under Art. 27.","tags":["classification","art27","risk-tier","irp-compliance"]}
{"id":"IRP-2026-06-04-005","timestamp":"2026-06-04T09:11:42Z","source":"assessment","type":"oversight_event","ai_proposed":"EU AI Act readiness score 47%, maturity 3/5","human_action":"confirmed","human_decision":"Score recorded as assessed","confirmed_by":"Johan Lopes Helgesson","rationale":"Reviewed scoring inputs against the questionnaire responses; no discrepancy found.","tags":["assessment","art14","human-oversight","irp-compliance"]}
{"id":"IRP-2026-06-04-006","timestamp":"2026-06-04T11:38:20Z","source":"remediation","type":"oversight_event","ai_proposed":"Remediation owner for Art. 12 gap: 'IT-ansvarig'","human_action":"confirmed_amended","human_decision":"Owner changed to named DPO; deadline brought forward to 2027-09-01","confirmed_by":"Johan Lopes Helgesson","rationale":"AI assigned a generic role; a named accountable person is required for the evidence record.","tags":["remediation","art14","human-oversight","irp-compliance"]}
{"id":"IRP-2026-06-04-007","timestamp":"2026-06-04T14:22:09Z","source":"fria","type":"oversight_event","ai_proposed":"FRIA section 3 draft: data retention risk classified as LOW","human_action":"rejected_amended","human_decision":"Retention risk raised to MEDIUM","confirmed_by":"Johan Lopes Helgesson","rationale":"Draft understated the 30-day retention exposure; corrected before the record was written. AI output was not accepted as-is.","tags":["fria","art14","human-oversight","irp-compliance"]}
{"id":"IRP-2026-06-04-008","timestamp":"2026-06-04T16:05:55Z","source":"scan","type":"oversight_event","ai_proposed":"Company scan risk level: HIGH","human_action":"rejected","human_decision":"Not recorded; risk level reassessed as MEDIUM on review","confirmed_by":"Johan Lopes Helgesson","rationale":"AI over-weighted a single Annex III keyword; manual review found the use case did not meet the high-risk threshold.","tags":["scan","art14","human-oversight","irp-compliance"]}
{"id":"IRP-2026-06-05-001","timestamp":"2026-06-05T08:47:13Z","source":"support_chat","type":"oversight_event","ai_proposed":"Support chat answer asserting a specific fine figure for a customer scenario","human_action":"declined","human_decision":"Answer not recorded as guidance; flagged as requiring legal review","confirmed_by":"Johan Lopes Helgesson","rationale":"AI produced a specific legal conclusion; this is outside the tool's intended-purpose scope and must not become a record.","tags":["support-chat","art14","human-oversight","irp-compliance"]}
{"id":"IRP-2026-06-05-002","timestamp":"2026-06-05T10:19:38Z","source":"fria","type":"oversight_event","ai_proposed":"FRIA section 5 draft: stakeholder groups and mitigation measures","human_action":"confirmed","human_decision":"Accepted as drafted after review","confirmed_by":"Johan Lopes Helgesson","rationale":"Reviewed against the assessment data; stakeholder mapping and mitigations were accurate and complete.","tags":["fria","art14","human-oversight","irp-compliance"]}