This thematic section explores oversight not as a discrete instrument, but as a governance architecture embedded in law, institutions, and technical systems – and enacted in practice. Whether technology is the object of oversight or the means by which it is carried out, accountability ultimately remains anchored in public authority and attaches to identifiable institutions and persons, even where execution is automated. Reasons must be provided, decisions explained and reviewable, and mistakes corrected. The contributions gathered here map that responsibility across legal bases (such as the GDPR, the AI Act, administrative law, freedom of information etc.), across organisational roles (such as providers, deployers, regulators, auditors), and across jurisdictions and regulatory sectors. They also show that effective oversight must operate both preventively and reactively. It begins in design and continues in review, binding what happens in a single file to the standards and interfaces that govern the system as a whole, and connecting duties in the individual case with architectural choices, interoperability arrangements, and impact-assessment practice
A Wed, study studied this question.