AI Regulation Tracker / Government and public sector

Bahrain Binds Its Government to a National AI Policy With Human Control at the Center

Version 1.0 took effect on May 20, 2025 and applies to every government entity in the Kingdom. Bahrain's Information and eGovernment Authority issued a General Policy for the Use of Artificial Intelligence that reads less like aspiration and more like an operating standard for public-sector AI, and its first principle keeps a human in charge of consequential decisions.

By Anthony Guerriero · The Leveraged Years Regulatory Research · Published July 21, 2026 · Last updated July 21, 2026

The short version

Bahrain's Information and eGovernment Authority (iGA) issued the General Policy for the Use of Artificial Intelligence, Version 1.0, dated May 20, 2025. It is a binding public-sector policy: it "applies to all government entities in the Kingdom of Bahrain" and sets rules those entities must follow when they adopt AI. Its first principle is human decision-making, stating that AI tools assist people but "the final decision in important matters must remain under human control, especially in cases related to individual and societal rights." The policy also folds in Bahrain's Personal Data Protection Law and other legislation, and adds principles on transparency, accountability, fairness, and safety. It does not directly bind private companies, but any US vendor, integrator, or multinational that sells AI to or operates with Bahrain government entities now has a concrete standard to meet, and the human-control framing is a clean governance template worth borrowing regardless of jurisdiction.

Regulatory Briefing

Instrument: General Policy for the Use of Artificial Intelligence, Version 1.0 (first release of the policy)
Authority: Information and eGovernment Authority (iGA), Kingdom of Bahrain
Jurisdiction: Kingdom of Bahrain; applies to all government entities ("concerned entities")
Bindingness: Binding on Bahrain government entities as an administrative policy. It is a public-sector operating standard, not a statute of general application to private business, and it does not by itself create private-party liability.
What Changed: Bahrain now has a single, government-wide AI policy that mandates human control over consequential decisions, ties AI use to existing data-protection and information-security law, and sets transparency and accountability requirements for public bodies.
Who This Affects: Bahrain government entities directly; and indirectly US and multinational AI vendors, cloud providers, integrators, and consultancies contracting with the Bahrain public sector.
Current Status: In effect. Version 1.0 released May 20, 2025 as the first version of the policy, subject to future review by the iGA.
Primary Source: iGA, General Policy for the Use of Artificial Intelligence (PDF), iga.gov.bh
Last Verified: July 21, 2026

Most national AI announcements are strategies. They talk about ambition, investment, and being a hub. Bahrain's Information and eGovernment Authority did something more useful and more binding. On May 20, 2025 it released Version 1.0 of a General Policy for the Use of Artificial Intelligence, and it is written as a set of rules that government entities have to comply with, not a wish list. If you build, sell, or deploy AI into the Bahrain public sector, this is the document that now governs how you are allowed to do it.

Who does the policy actually bind?

The scope is explicit. In the iGA's own words, "This policy applies to all government entities in the Kingdom of Bahrain." The glossary defines the "concerned entities" it governs as "Government entities in the Kingdom of Bahrain." So this is a public-sector instrument. It does not reach out and regulate private companies the way a statute of general application would. What it does is set the standard that every ministry, authority, and government body has to meet when it uses AI, which in turn becomes the standard that anyone selling AI into that market has to satisfy to win and keep the work. That is the honest way to read its force: binding on government, and binding on you by contract if you want to serve government.

Why the human-control principle is the headline

The policy is built on eleven principles, and the very first one is the one worth memorizing. Under "First Principle: Human Decision-Making," the iGA writes that AI technologies "are tools to assist humans in decision-making. However, the final decision in important matters must remain under human control, especially in cases related to individual and societal rights." That is a clean, quotable statement of the human-in-the-loop idea that keeps showing up in serious AI governance regimes worldwide. It does not ban automation. It says that when a decision touches people's rights, a human has to own the final call. If you are designing an AI system for a government client here, you need to be able to point to where the human sits in the loop and what they actually decide.

What else the policy requires

The human-control principle does not stand alone. The policy layers in ten more principles covering safety and prevention of harm, fairness and non-discrimination, transparency and explainability, responsibility and accountability, integrity and non-fabrication, privacy and data protection, reliability and safety, and protection of intellectual property. Its first pillar, "Commitment to Policies and Legislations," ties AI use back to hard law: government entities must comply with Bahrain's Personal Data Protection Law (Law No. 30 of 2018), the Protection of Information and State Documents Law (Law No. 16 of 2014), the Cybercrime Law (Law No. 60 of 2014), and the Open Data Policy, and it adopts the GCC guiding manual on AI ethics. In other words, the policy does not float above existing law. It routes AI governance through the data-protection, information-security, and cybercrime statutes already on the books.

What US executives and counsel should take from it

Two practical reads. First, if your company touches the Bahrain public sector, treat this policy as a procurement gate. Expect government buyers to require evidence that your system keeps a human in control of consequential decisions, that it complies with Bahrain's data-protection and state-information laws, and that it can be explained to non-specialists. Build that documentation before the tender, not after. Second, even if you never go near Bahrain, the structure is portable. A government-wide policy that names a small number of clear principles, puts human decision-making first, and anchors AI use to existing privacy and security law is exactly the shape a good internal AI governance policy takes. It is a short, readable model you can hand to your own risk and legal teams as a starting template. None of this is US law, and none of it binds a US private company on its own. It is a benchmark and, for anyone in the Gulf market, a live compliance requirement.

Questions professionals are asking

Is Bahrain's AI policy legally binding?

It is binding on Bahrain government entities as an administrative policy. The document states it "applies to all government entities in the Kingdom of Bahrain" and sets rules those entities must follow. It is a public-sector operating standard rather than a statute of general application, so it does not directly regulate private companies or create private-party liability on its own.

Does it apply to private companies or US vendors?

Not directly. It governs government entities. But any US or multinational vendor, cloud provider, or integrator selling AI to the Bahrain public sector will have to meet it in practice, because government buyers must comply with it and will push those requirements down through procurement and contracts.

What is the human-control requirement?

The policy's first principle, Human Decision-Making, states that AI tools assist people but "the final decision in important matters must remain under human control, especially in cases related to individual and societal rights." Systems serving Bahrain government must keep an accountable human in control of consequential, rights-affecting decisions.

How does it interact with data-protection law?

The policy's first pillar requires government entities to comply with existing law when using AI, expressly including Bahrain's Personal Data Protection Law (Law No. 30 of 2018), the Protection of Information and State Documents Law, and the Cybercrime Law. AI governance is routed through those statutes rather than treated as separate.

RELATED BRIEFINGS

Browse the full AI Regulation News tracker

Informational analysis for working professionals, not legal advice. Confirm how any policy or requirement applies to your situation with qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.