Chile - Algorithmic Transparency Recommendations (372/2024)
Exempt Resolution No. 372 — Recommendations of the Council for Transparency on Algorithmic Transparency
Resolución Exenta N° 372 — Recomendaciones del Consejo para la Transparencia sobre transparencia algorítmica (Recommendations on algorithmic transparency)
Chile
RAI-CL-NA-REN3RXX-2024Chile - Algorithmic Transparency Recommendations (372/2024) is Adopted in Chile as of 8 Sep 2026, according to consejotransparencia.cl.
GuidelineTransparency and DisclosureAccountability and DocumentationGovernance and OversightResolución Exenta N° 372, issued by Chile's Council for Transparency in 2024, guides public entities using automated decision systems on algorithmic transparency. Currently adopted, it directs state agencies to publish active registries detailing algorithmic logic, data use, and human review options. It was published on 30 August 2024.
Summary
Resolución Exenta N° 372 is currently adopted. The most recent dated milestone occurred on 17 July 2025, when the Council for Transparency published its implementation guide titled Guía para la Adopción de las Recomendaciones sobre Transparencia Algorítmica to facilitate voluntary adoption by public entities based on their technological maturity. Because these recommendations are non-binding guidance, no body enforces them with compulsory sanctions or fines, though the Council for Transparency oversees public sector transparency and promotes adoption across state agencies.
Formally issued by the Council for Transparency on 12 August 2024 and published in the Diario Oficial on 30 August 2024, the resolution approves official recommendations for public entities that use automated and semi-automated decision systems. It responds to the expanding use of algorithmic tools in Chilean public administration, aiming to align public decision-making with access to information principles, fundamental rights, privacy, and non-discrimination.
The instrument establishes general recommendations regarding clear language, multi-media accessibility, human oversight, and public procurement transparency, as well as specific proactive transparency standards. Under these standards, public bodies are advised to publish a structured registry on their active transparency portals detailing the purpose, logic, data categories, impact considerations, and contact points for human review for each algorithmic decision system in use.
Full article
Read full text ↗Overview
Resolución Exenta N° 372 (dated 12 August 2024 and published in the Diario Oficial on 30 August 2024) approves the text of the "Recomendaciones del Consejo para la Transparencia sobre Transparencia Algorítmica". The measure is an advisory, non‑binding set of recommendations targeted at public bodies subject to the Law on Access to Public Information (Law N°20.285) and related rules. It was adopted by the CPLT to respond to the expanding use of systems of automated and semi‑automated decisions (SDA) across public agencies and to align transparency practice with the protection of fundamental rights. The full text appears in the official publication for the Diario Oficial and is distributed by the CPLT; see the official resolution document at CPLT / Diario Oficial PDF (Resolución Exenta N° 372) and the CPLT announcement at CPLT news release.
Definitions
The recommendations define and rely on key concepts: "systems of decisions automated and semi‑automated (SDA)" to include algorithmic systems, models and decision support systems used to make or inform public decisions; "transparency proactiva" (proactive transparency) to indicate systematic public disclosure through transparency portals; "black‑box" systems to describe models whose internal logic is not directly interpretable by non‑developers; and "sujetos obligados" as those entities obliged under Law N°20.285 to provide public information. The text situates these terms within existing Chilean laws (including Law N°20.285, Ley N°19.628 on privacy, and Ley N°21.180 on digital transformation) and international standards cited in the preamble.
Governance and Institutional Framework
The CPLT positions itself as a promoter of transparency best practices and issues these recommendations pursuant to its authority under Article 33(e) of Law N°20.285. The resolution refers to collaboration with other State instruments and prior guidance (for example, the Ministerial Oficio Circular N°711, 11 December 2023) and situates the recommendations as complementary to national initiatives (including the National AI Policy). The CPLT encourages internal governance measures within agencies—appointment of responsible officers for SDA transparency, maintenance of inventories, version control and audit trails—and coordination between data protection, cybersecurity and procurement units. For reference and formal publication consult the official resolution at the Diario Oficial PDF: Diario Oficial (CVE 2537198) and the CPLT guidance repository at CPLT guide page.
Key Focus Areas
The recommendations are structured around several substantive focus areas. First, proactive transparency: agencies should publish a standardised set of information about any SDA that affects public services, benefits, eligibility or rights—this includes the name of the system, objectives, areas of application (services/trámites), general architecture or model type, decision logic description, categories and sources of data used, known impacts and risk mitigation measures, procurement and contractor information, update cadence and contact points for human review. Second, accessibility and communication: information must be concise, intelligible and available in multiple formats to reach diverse audiences. Third, auditability and documentation: agencies should retain technical documentation, model specifications, training/validation data summaries and logs to support ex post audits and oversight. Fourth, balance with confidentiality: when confidentiality, privacy or IP limit disclosure, agencies should document legal bases for non‑disclosure and publish as much information as possible. Fifth, handling opaque or proprietary models: preference is given to systems enabling monitoring and explainability; when black‑box solutions are used, agencies must document compensating controls (independent audits, human oversight, impact assessments). Sixth, rights protection: guidance emphasises non‑discrimination, due process and privacy safeguards and aligns with pending personal data protection reforms.
Implementation Framework
The resolution recommends a practical, staged approach for adoption. Agencies are advised to create internal inventories and to integrate a "Transparencia Algorítmica" section into their active transparency portals, with periodic updates (the CPLT suggests monthly reporting for active systems). The CPLT’s later technical guide (2025) provides templates and examples, recommended metadata fields and illustrative entries (e.g., the School Admission System — MINEDUC). The implementation framework favours proportionality: agencies with greater technological maturity are encouraged to publish more granular technical documentation, while smaller agencies should at minimum publish plain‑language descriptions and contact mechanisms. Recommended operational steps include: appointing a responsible transparency officer; conducting an initial mapping; applying a minimal metadata schema (registry entry, function, scope, data categories, contact information); establishing update and audit processes; and documenting decisions on non‑disclosure. See the CPLT adoption guide at CPLT guide for implementation tools and templates.
Monitoring and Evaluation
Monitoring is framed as both the CPLT’s advisory follow‑up role and the responsibility of each agency to self‑report. The CPLT recommends that agencies publish version histories, update logs and impact monitoring (including identified errors, bias incidents and corrective measures). The CPLT envisages periodic reviews and encourages pilot testing, independent audits and cross‑agency knowledge sharing. While the recommendations are not coercive, failure to adopt transparent practices may be flagged in CPLT oversight reports and could inform subsequent formal interventions under Law N°20.285. The CPLT and other oversight bodies are encouraged to use published registries to analyze sectoral adoption rates and identify systemic risks.
Penalties, Liability, and Appeals
These recommendations do not by themselves create new criminal or administrative sanctions. The CPLT explicitly issues them as non‑binding guidance that informs how agencies should meet transparency obligations under existing laws. Nevertheless, transparency failures can be the subject of requests, complaints and judicial review under Law N°20.285 and related statutes; agencies may be required to justify non‑disclosure based on specific legal grounds. The document advises agencies to document decisions that restrict disclosure to facilitate external review. Potential consequences for systemic non‑compliance include reputational damage, CPLT findings, and referral to competent authorities when other legal infractions (e.g., data protection breaches) are identified.
Relationship to Other Instruments
The resolution cross‑references and complements multiple Chilean instruments: Law N°20.285 (Access to Public Information), Ley N°19.628 (Protection of Private Life), Ley N°21.180 (Digital Transformation of the State), Oficio Circular N°711 (Ministries guidance on AI use, Dec 2023), and emerging data protection and cybersecurity frameworks (including Ley N°21.663 on cybersecurity references). The recommendations explicitly cite the 2021 study with Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez as background research (identifying 92 SDA across 42 agencies) and position the guidance alongside the National AI Policy and ongoing legislative work on data protection and AI regulation. By design, the recommendations are interoperable with procurement rules and sectoral guidance (finance, health, social protection) and encourage harmonization through publication standards to be adopted in state transparency portals.
International Alignment
The CPLT anchors the recommendations in international norms and comparative developments, citing instruments such as UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence and relevant practices from data protection and access‑to‑information authorities internationally. The text emphasizes alignment with international standards on explainability, non‑discrimination and human oversight, and encourages participatory development and knowledge exchange with peer regulators. The CPLT’s international engagement and publications related to these recommendations are described on their site and in conference reports; see CPLT materials at Consejo para la Transparencia.
Implementation Timeline
| Event | Date | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Council approval (session) | 2024‑08‑01 | Council Directivo session N° 1.456 approved the recommendations. |
| Resolution signed (date on document) | 2024‑08‑12 | Date of the Resolución Exenta N° 372. |
| Publication in Diario Oficial | 2024‑08‑30 | Official publication (Núm. 43.938, CVE 2537198). |
| CPLT adoption guide published | 2025‑07‑17 | CPLT published a guide to assist adoption of the recommendations. |
Sources and References
Requirements for a company
What an organisation has to do under Chile - Algorithmic Transparency Recommendations (372/2024), at a glance. Not legal advice — the table below gives the provision and deadline for each item.
Not yet in force (Adopted). These requirements apply once the instrument takes effect and may change before then.
Must do
0Nothing in this category.
Must not do
0Nothing in this category.
Should do
8- Publish standardized information about automated decision systems on active transparency portals, including decision logic, data sources, and objectives.Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems
- Create and maintain an internal inventory of all automated and semi-automated decision systems used across the organization.Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems
- Appoint a responsible officer to oversee algorithmic transparency, system documentation, and compliance reporting.Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems
- Document compensating controls such as independent audits, human oversight, and impact assessments when deploying opaque or black-box models.Chilean public bodies using opaque algorithmic models
- Retain technical specifications, model documentation, training data summaries, and audit logs to enable post-deployment oversight.Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems
- Integrate a dedicated Algorithmic Transparency section into public portals and update active system information on a regular basis.Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems
- +2 more in the table below
Should not do
0Nothing in this category.
Who must do what
The obligations under Chile - Algorithmic Transparency Recommendations (372/2024), most serious first. Not legal advice — verify against the official text before relying on it.
| # | Who | Requirement | By when | Where | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems | Publish standardized information about automated decision systems on active transparency portals, including decision logic, data sources, and objectives. | — | Key Focus Areas | Recommended |
| 2 | Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems | Create and maintain an internal inventory of all automated and semi-automated decision systems used across the organization. | — | Governance and Institutional Framework | Recommended |
| 3 | Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems | Appoint a responsible officer to oversee algorithmic transparency, system documentation, and compliance reporting. | — | Governance and Institutional Framework | Recommended |
| 4 | Chilean public bodies using opaque algorithmic models | Document compensating controls such as independent audits, human oversight, and impact assessments when deploying opaque or black-box models. | — | Key Focus Areas | Recommended |
| 5 | Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems | Retain technical specifications, model documentation, training data summaries, and audit logs to enable post-deployment oversight. | — | Key Focus Areas | Recommended |
| 6 | Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems | Integrate a dedicated Algorithmic Transparency section into public portals and update active system information on a regular basis. | — | Implementation Framework | Recommended |
| 7 | Chilean public bodies restricting SDA disclosures | Document specific legal grounds whenever restricting disclosure of algorithmic details due to privacy, confidentiality, or intellectual property limits. | — | Key Focus Areas | Recommended |
| 8 | Chilean public bodies using automated decision systems | Provide clear and accessible contact points allowing individuals affected by algorithmic decisions to request human review. | — | Key Focus Areas | Recommended |
Related Regulations
Chile - AI Use in Government (Oficio No. 711/2023)
Chile91% similar
Chile - AI Tools Guidelines (711/2023)
Chile91% similar
Chile - Consumer Protection in AI (Resolución Exenta N°33/2022)
Chile90% similar
Chile - National AI Policy Update (12/2024)
Chile90% similar
Chile - AI Systems Regulation (Boletín 16821-19)
Chile89% similar
More AI regulation in Chile
AI regulation in Chile: full overview
- Chile AI Regulation Overview
- Chile - Prevention Models Regulation (662/2025)
- Chile - Qualification of Vital Operators (285/2025)
- Chile - Essential Services Registration (N°1/2025)
- Chile - Cybersecurity Framework Law (21.663)
- Chile - National AI Action Plan
- Chile - Criminal Code Amendment (Boletín 15935-07)
- Chile - AI-use Aggravating Circumstance (Boletín 16021-07)
© Regulations.AI · updated on 20 Sep 2026 · reviewed against official sources on 8 Sep 2026 using Gemini 3.6 Flash