Automation of Judicial Decision-making as Protection of Non-distributive Rights
Vol.33,No.1(2025)
The text focuses on non-distributive rights and the possibility of protecting them through the introduction of automated decision-making. To do so, it first introduces the concept of non-distributive rights in general (based on Holländer's conception), then the thesis attempts to identify the non-distributive aspect that could be protected by the introduction of automation. In relation to this, the work will focus on the possible non-distributive component of the right to a fair trial, as a right to effective judicial protection, taking into account the case law of the ECtHR. An analogous approach to this will be studied through the protection against bad faith complaints. Finally, the paper will contrast the interference with the individual right to a fair trial against the generally addressed efficiency of the judicial system, with respect to substantive fair trial (timely acceptable outcome) vs. formal fair trial (formally fair delayed outcome). Thus, it should be a conceptualisation or adoption of the concept of non-distributive rights and its subsequent use to assess the possibility of introducing automated decision-making in judicial processes.
Non-distributive Rights; Automation of Judicial Decision-making; Right to Judicial Protection; Efficiency of Judicial Proceedings
29–50
Andrej Krištofík
Institute of Law and Technology, Faculty of Law, Masaryk University, Brno
Ph.D. student
ABRUSCI, E., SCOTT, R. The questionable necessity of a new human right against being subject to automated decision-making. International Journal of Law and Technology. 2023, roč. 31, č. 2, s. 114–143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaad013
ALAKWE, K. Human Dignity in the Era of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics: Issues and Prospects. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Studies. 2023, roč. 5, č. 6, s. 87–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32996/jhsss.2023.5.6.10
ALEXY, R. A Theory of Constitutional Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
ANDERSON, D. The convergence of ADR and ODR within the courts: The impact on access to justice. Civil Justice Quarterly. 2019, roč. 38, č. 1, s. 126–143.
ANTER, A. The Modern State and Its Monopoly on Violence. In: HANDKE, E. (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Max Weber. Oxford: OUP, 2019, s. 226–236. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190679545.013.13
ASSIMOV, I. Oceľové jaskyne. Argo, 2012.
AYSOLMAZ, B. a kol. The public perceptions of algorithmic decision-making systems: Results from a large-scale survey. Telematics and Informatics [online]. 2023, roč. 79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2023.101954
BAMFORTH, N. Articles 13 and 35(1), Subsidiarity, and the Effective Protection of European Convention Rights in National Law. European Human Rights Law Review. Sweet and Maxwell, 2016, č. 5, s. 501–517.
BEKKUM, M. a kol. Digital welfare fraud detection and the Dutch SyRI judgment. European Journal of Social Security [online]. 2021, roč. 23, č. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211031257
BENSON, P. Abstract Right and The Possibility of a Nondistributive Conception of Contract: Hegel and Contemporary Contract Theory. Cardozo Law Review. 1989, č. 10.
BERGER, V. Judikatura Evropského soudu pro lidská práva. IFEC, 2003.
BRKAN, M. Do algorithms rule the world? Algorithmic decision-making and data protection in the framework of the GDPR and beyond. International Journal of Law and Technology. 2019, roč. 27, č. 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eay017
CAMPAGNA, N. Leviathan and Its Judges. ARSP: Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie / Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy. 2000, roč. 86, č. 4, s. 499–517. Dostupné z: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23681490
CEPEJ. Cepej Studies No. 23: European judicial systems – Efficiency and quality of justice. Council of Europe [online]. 2016. Dostupné z: https://rm.coe.int/european-judicial-systems-efficiency-and-quality-of-justice-cepej-stud/1680786b58
CEPEJ. European ethical Charter on the use of Artificial Intelligence in judicial systems and their environment. European Commision [online]. Dostupné z: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/196205/COUNCIL%20OF%20EUROPE%20-%20European%20Ethical%20Charter%20on%20the%20use%20of%20AI%20in%20judicial%20systems.pdf
CORDELLA, A., CONTINI, F. Law and Technology in Civil Judicial Procedures. In: BROWNSWORD, R. a kol. The Oxford Handbook of Law, Regulation and Technology. Oxford, 2016, s. 246–269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199680832.013.47
COWEN, T. Public goods. EconLib [online]. Dostupné z: https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PublicGoods.html
DIMYTRUK, M. The Right to a Fair Trial in Automated Civil Proceedings. Masaryk University Journal of Law and technology. 2019, roč. 13, č. 1, s. 27–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2019-1-2
GANS-COMBE, C. Automated Justice: Issues, Benefits and Risks in the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Its Algorithms in Access to Justice and Law Enforcement. In: O‘MATHÚNA, D., IPHOFEN, R. (eds.). Ethics, Integrity and Policymaking. Springer, 2022, s. 175–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15746-2_14
GROSFELD, E. a kol. Value Alignment and Public Perceived Legitimacy of the European Union and the Court of Justice. Frontiers of psychology. 2022, roč. 12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.785892
HARRIS, D. a kol. Law of European Convention on Human Rights. OUP, 2009.
HEGEL, G. W. F. Philosophy of Right. Dover Philosophical Classics, 2005.
HELLWIG, P., MAIER, G. Justice and Fairness Perceptions in Automated Decision-Making – Current Findings and Design Implications. In: GRÄßLER, I. a kol. (eds.). The Digital Twin of Humans: An Interdisciplinary Concept of Digital Working Environments in Industry 4.0. Springer, 2023, s. 63–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26104-6_4
HIGH-LEVEL EXPERT GROUP ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI. European Commission [online]. 2019. Dostupné z: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai
HOBBES, T. Leviathan. Londýn, 1651.
HOLLÄNDER, P. Filosofie práva. Aleš Čeněk, 2006.
HOLLÄNDER, P. Základy všeobecné státovědy. Plzeň: Aleš Čeněk, 2012.
CHOUNG, H. a kol. When AI is Perceived to Be Fairer than a Human: Understanding Perceptions of Algorithmic Decisions in a Job Application Context. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction [online]. 2023, s. 7451–7468. Dostupné z: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2266244
INVERARDI, P. The Challenge of Human Dignity in the Era of Autonomous Systems. In: WERTHNER, H. a kol. (eds.). Perspectives on Digital Humanism. 2022, s. 25–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86144-5_4
KALLHOFF, A. Public Goods as Obligatory Bridges between the Public and the Private. Philosophical Papers. 2022, roč. 50, s. 387–405. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1080/05568641.2022.2046494
KAMINSKI, R. T. Escaping The Cyber State Of Nature: Cyber Deterrence And International Institutions. In: CZZOSECK, C., PODINS, K. (eds.). Conference on Cyber Conflict Proceedings. 2010.
KENDLA, K. J. Robotkohtunik: kas ulmefilm või lähitulevik? Juridica. 2024, č. 7, s. 483–495.
KIANPOUR, M. a kol. Advancing the concept of cybersecurity as a public good. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory. [online]. 2022 roč. 22, č. 116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2022.102493
KILINÇ, B. A Trial to Understand the Concept of Fair Trial. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2016, č. 35.
KIRAT, T. a kol. Fairness and explainability in automatic decision-making systems. A challenge for computer science and law. EURO Journal on Decision Processes. 2023, roč. 11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejdp.2023.100036
KMEC, J. a kol. Evropská úmluva o lidských právech: komentář. C. H. Beck, 2012.
KOSKENNIEMI, M. The Politics of International Law. Hart Publishing, 2011.
KRIŠTOFÍK, A. Vybrané aspekty práva na spravodlivý proces a automatizácia rozhodovania. Revue pro právo a technologie. 2021, roč. 12, č. 24, s. 221–325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5817/RPT2021-2-6
KRIŠTOFÍK, A. Právo na odôvodnené rozhodnutie a algoritmizácia rozhodovacích systémov. Právnik. 2023, č. 1, s. 39–48.
KRIŠTOFÍK, A. Automatizácia vo verejnej správe v kontexte ochrany osobných údajov: holandský model zdieľania dát medzi inštitúciami. Správní právo. 2024.
LEE, R. L. The American Courts as Public Goods: Who Should Pay the Costs of Litigation? Catholic University Law Review. 1985, roč. 34, č. 2, s. 267–278.
LIU, H. a kol. Beyond State v Loomis: artificial intelligence, government algorithmization and accountability. International Journal of Law and Information Technology [online]. 2019, roč. 27, č. 2, s. 122–141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaz001
LOADER, I., WALKER, N. Security as a global public good. In: Civilizing Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, s. 234–264. DOI: https://10.1017/CBO9780511611117.012
MATHIAS, K., SHANNON, D. Efficiency Instead of Justice? Searching for the Philosophical Foundations of the Economic Analysis of Law. Springer, 2009.
MCGUIRE, M. C. Leviathan, Taxation, and Public Goods. In: CONGLETON, R. a kol. The Oxford Handbook of Public Choice, vol. II. Oxford, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190469771.013.11
MILLER, D. Justice, democracy and public goods. In: DOWDING. K. a kol. (eds.). Justice and Democracy: Essays for Brian Barry. Cambridge University Press, 2004, s. 127–149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490217.008
MITTELSTADT, B., RUSSELL, Ch., WACHTER, S. Explaining Explanations in AI. FAT* ‚19: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 2019, s. 279–288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287574
MOLEK, P. Právo na spravedlivý proces. Wolters Kluwer, 2012.
MOORE, J. W. What Is the Sense of Agency and Why Does it Matter? Frontiers of Psychology [online]. 2016, č. 7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01272
PAPAGIANNEAS, S., JUNIUS, N. Fairness and justice through automation in China’s smart courts. Computer Law & Security Review. 2023, roč. 51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2023.105897
POLČÁK, R. Internet a proměny práva. Auditorium, 2012.
POLČÁK, R. a kol. Právní problémy kybernetické bezpečnosti. Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 2016.
PTÁČNIK, J. Teorie společenské smlouvy Thomase Hobbese: koncentrace koncentrace moci na úkor svobody jako prostředek ochrany proti násilí. In: NEXERA, V. a kol. Teorie společenských smluv. Analýza vybraných novověkých konceptů. Brno: Klemm, 2013.
SANDEL, M. Justice: What’s The Right thing to do. Farrar, 2002.
SCHÄFERLING, S. The Underlying Challenge to Human Agency. In: SCHÄFERLING, S. Governmental Automated Decision-Making and Human Rights: Reconciling Law and Intelligent Systems. Springer, 2023, s. 185–227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48125-3_6
SCHWENNINGER, S. A New Social Contract. Challenge [online]. 2010, č. 5, roč. 53, s. 34–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2753/0577-5132530503
SPAULDING, N. W. Online Dispute Resolution and the End of Adversarial Justice? In: ENGSTROM, D. (ed.). Legal Tech and the Future of Civil Justice. Cambridge University Press, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009255301.015
STARKE, Ch. a kol. Fairness perceptions of algorithmic decision-making: A systematic review of the empirical literature. Big Data and Society. 2021, roč. 9, č. 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517221115189
SUSSKIND, R. Online courts and future of justice. Oxford, 2019, s. 253–293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198838364.001.0001
SVOBODA, K. a kol. Občanský soudní řád: komentář. C. H. Beck, 2017.
ŠIMÁČKOVÁ, K. Právní stát nebo vláda práva? In: GERLOCH, A., KYSELA, J. 20 let Ústavy České republiky: ohlédnutí zpět a pohled vpřed. Plzeň: Aleš Čeněk, 2013, s. 167–176.
USAID. DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTING COURT AUTOMATION PROJECTS Practical Guidance for USAID DRG Officers. Washington, 2019. Dostupné z: https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/USAID-CAP-Guide-FINAL.pdf
VRCHA, P. Odůvodnění civilního rozsudku. Leges, 2021.
WEALE, A. Democratic Justice and the Social Contract. Oxford: OUP, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684649.001.0001
ZDRAVKOVA, K. Reconsidering human dignity in the new era. New Ideas in Psychology. 2019, roč. 54, s. 112–117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2018.12.004
ŽIŽEK, S. Violence. Londýn: Profile Books, 2009.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2025 Andrej Krištofík