[ GOVERNANCE COUNCIL ]

Multi-perspective deliberation

Sentinel chairs the governance process. Relevant specialists join based on the case. Evidence is reviewed, disagreement is recorded, and a balanced recommendation is prepared for accountable human decision.

Interactive Prototype — Demonstration Data

DELIBERATION FLOW

GOVERNANCE CASE · DEMONSTRATION

AI-Assisted Recruitment Shortlisting

Northstar Public Services · Demonstration Organisation

HIGH RISKESCALATE5 PERSPECTIVES

Demonstration Data — Not a Live Client Assessment. Structured governance perspectives generated within the Sentinel prototype.

COUNCIL PERSPECTIVES

⚖️

Legal Perspective

Dissent

QUESTION EXAMINED

Does the organisation have legal authority to use AI in this context? Are there statutory obligations or prohibitions?

EVIDENCE CONSIDERED

Employment legislation, data protection law, sector-specific regulation

KEY CONCERN

No documented legal basis for automated shortlisting. Candidate notification obligations unclear.

RECOMMENDED CONTROL

Obtain legal opinion on lawful basis. Document compliance with employment law.

CONFIDENCE:

Medium

FINAL PANEL SUMMARY

POINTS OF AGREEMENT

Human review required before any rejection

Candidate transparency notice is mandatory

Named accountable executive must be assigned

DISSENTING CONCERNS

No legal basis documented for automated shortlisting

DPIA not completed — privacy risk unresolved

Independent bias assessment not commissioned

MISSING EVIDENCE

Fairness testing results

Data Protection Impact Assessment

Legal basis documentation

Candidate notification template

RECOMMENDED OUTCOME

Escalate

Proceed only after mandatory controls are implemented and independently reviewed. Human decision required.

Proceed
Proceed with Controls
Escalate
Pause
Reject