Fair and efficient asylum procedures and artificial intelligence: Quo Vadis due process?

IF 3.3 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW Computer Law & Security Review Pub Date : 2024-09-06 DOI:10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106050
{"title":"Fair and efficient asylum procedures and artificial intelligence: Quo Vadis due process?","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In a context of high pressure on national asylum systems and a strive for efficiency, public authorities in Europe are increasingly exploring the potential of artificial intelligence-driven technologies in the asylum process. The use of this technology in the field of asylum is a growing but contentious topic, which raises important normative questions and concerns. In this context, this paper aims to analyse the potential implications for fair asylum procedures when artificial intelligence (AI) assists decision-making. Fair asylum procedures, or due process, are a central condition for guaranteeing the right to asylum and preventing unlawful refoulement, and overall ensuring trust in the asylum adjudication system. After revisiting the theoretical foundations of the concept of fair procedures, this paper develops a normative framework that can guide further reflection on the use of AI in asylum procedures. It thereby analyses the concepts that are key to the debate on the use of AI in decision-making: accuracy, efficiency but also participation. Then, drawing on scholarship in both political science and computer science, it explores potential challenges for the core values of fair procedures, considering both technical and non-technical challenges. This paper concludes that while AI promises efficiency gains for the administration, it identifies important challenges for accuracy and participation. On the basis of these considerations, it highlights the questions that should be asked and answered in order to protect the core values of fair asylum procedures.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51516,"journal":{"name":"Computer Law & Security Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Law & Security Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026736492400116X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a context of high pressure on national asylum systems and a strive for efficiency, public authorities in Europe are increasingly exploring the potential of artificial intelligence-driven technologies in the asylum process. The use of this technology in the field of asylum is a growing but contentious topic, which raises important normative questions and concerns. In this context, this paper aims to analyse the potential implications for fair asylum procedures when artificial intelligence (AI) assists decision-making. Fair asylum procedures, or due process, are a central condition for guaranteeing the right to asylum and preventing unlawful refoulement, and overall ensuring trust in the asylum adjudication system. After revisiting the theoretical foundations of the concept of fair procedures, this paper develops a normative framework that can guide further reflection on the use of AI in asylum procedures. It thereby analyses the concepts that are key to the debate on the use of AI in decision-making: accuracy, efficiency but also participation. Then, drawing on scholarship in both political science and computer science, it explores potential challenges for the core values of fair procedures, considering both technical and non-technical challenges. This paper concludes that while AI promises efficiency gains for the administration, it identifies important challenges for accuracy and participation. On the basis of these considerations, it highlights the questions that should be asked and answered in order to protect the core values of fair asylum procedures.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公平高效的庇护程序与人工智能:Quo Vadis due process?
在国家庇护制度面临巨大压力和努力提高效率的背景下,欧洲公共当局越来越多地探索人工智能技术在庇护程序中的潜力。在庇护领域使用人工智能技术是一个日益增长但又充满争议的话题,它引发了重要的规范问题和关切。在此背景下,本文旨在分析人工智能(AI)辅助决策对公平庇护程序的潜在影响。公平的庇护程序或正当程序是保障庇护权、防止非法驱回以及从整体上确保对庇护裁决系统信任的核心条件。在重新审视了公平程序概念的理论基础之后,本文制定了一个规范性框架,以指导对在庇护程序中使用人工智能的进一步思考。因此,本文分析了有关在决策中使用人工智能的辩论中的关键概念:准确性、效率以及参与。然后,本文借鉴政治学和计算机科学的研究成果,探讨了公平程序的核心价值可能面临的挑战,同时考虑了技术和非技术方面的挑战。本文的结论是,虽然人工智能有望提高行政部门的效率,但也对准确性和参与性提出了重要挑战。基于这些考虑,本文强调了为保护公平庇护程序的核心价值而应提出和回答的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
10.30%
发文量
81
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: CLSR publishes refereed academic and practitioner papers on topics such as Web 2.0, IT security, Identity management, ID cards, RFID, interference with privacy, Internet law, telecoms regulation, online broadcasting, intellectual property, software law, e-commerce, outsourcing, data protection, EU policy, freedom of information, computer security and many other topics. In addition it provides a regular update on European Union developments, national news from more than 20 jurisdictions in both Europe and the Pacific Rim. It is looking for papers within the subject area that display good quality legal analysis and new lines of legal thought or policy development that go beyond mere description of the subject area, however accurate that may be.
期刊最新文献
Procedural fairness in automated asylum procedures: Fundamental rights for fundamental challenges Asia-Pacific developments An Infrastructural Brussels Effect: The translation of EU Law into the UK's digital borders Mapping interpretations of the law in online content moderation in Germany A European right to end-to-end encryption?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1