AI Governance Basics: Who Is Accountable When AI Gets It Wrong
AI Governance, Risk & Compliance Track · Certified AI Governance Associate
This is the entry point to the governance track and the prerequisite for the courses that follow. It answers the question most organisations get wrong: when an AI system produces a harmful, unfair or unlawful outcome, who is actually answerable, and what were they supposed to have done beforehand? Learners build a working vocabulary — data fiduciary, deployer, developer, risk classification, human oversight — and learn to read India's principle-based approach against the rule-based approach taken in the EU. The course deliberately separates what is legally binding from what is voluntary guidance, because conflating the two is the single most common error in AI governance conversations.
Learning objectives
- 01Explain in plain language who is accountable for an AI outcome and on what legal basis
- 02Distinguish binding law from voluntary guidance when someone cites an AI framework
- 03Apply the seven sutras of the India AI Governance Guidelines to a real business decision
- 04Identify which of the six MeitY risk categories a proposed AI use case touches
- 05Recognise when a use case needs escalation to legal, risk or the board rather than a manager sign-off
15-module program
Full curriculum in preparation
This course is being written now by the ITHR editorial team. Join the waitlist and we'll notify you the moment the full syllabus, hands-on labs, and certification exam are live. No enrollment is accepted until publication.

