What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on 4.2.2 Legal and regulatory requirements?

Documented process for identifying and assessing continuity related legal and regulatory requirements; Current obligations register with source, applicability and assessment date; Traceability from an obligation to the BCMS element that satisfies it; Evidence of horizon scanning or subscription to a legal update source.

What is the most common gap auditors find on 4.2.2?

Obligations register held by legal and never reconciled against the BCMS

ISO 22301:2019 · Context of the organization, ISO 22301:2019

`4.2.2` Legal and regulatory requirements

Run and maintain a process that finds, obtains access to and assesses the legal and regulatory requirements applying to the continuity of the organization's products, services, activities and resources, ensure those requirements are reflected in how the BCMS is built and run, and keep that information documented and current.

Source: ISO 22301:2019, 4.2.2. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open ISO 22301:2019 in the compliance library.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

moderate

to go live

Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling

where the evidence lives

teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

Evidence of horizon scanning or subscription to a legal update source · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

none for this control

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Documented process for identifying and assessing continuity related legal and regulatory requirements · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Current obligations register with source, applicability and assessment date · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Traceability from an obligation to the BCMS element that satisfies it · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Start with the 1 of 4 artefacts that already live in a system (Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Obligations register held by legal and never reconciled against the BCMS
No assessment step, so the register lists laws without saying what they demand of continuity
Regime changes in new operating jurisdictions missed because the process has no trigger

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

4.2.1 General · 4.3 Determining the scope of the business continuity management system