欧盟边境管制中“算法自由裁量权”与自动化的法治挑战

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY European Journal of Migration and Law Pub Date : 2023-08-30 DOI:10.1163/15718166-12340152
Amanda Musco Eklund
{"title":"欧盟边境管制中“算法自由裁量权”与自动化的法治挑战","authors":"Amanda Musco Eklund","doi":"10.1163/15718166-12340152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) will profile visa- exempt third-country nationals using a screening rules algorithm to make automated predictive risk assessments. By using the screening rules algorithm as a case study, this article analyses if the ETIAS Regulation, and the legal safeguards it establishes for the decision-making process, comply with formal and substantive legality requirements as defined by the Venice Commission and the Court of Justice of the European Union. Three legality challenges are identified: [1] The regulatory design of ETIAS raises issues in relation to the foreseeability, clarity and accessibility of law, as well as insufficient limits to discretion. [2] The ETIAS screening rules algorithm represents a development towards a new form of arbitrariness through ‘algorithmic discretion’. [3] The safeguard of manual (human) processing in case of a ‘hit’ is not a panacea for the identified legality challenges.","PeriodicalId":51819,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Migration and Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rule of Law Challenges of ‘Algorithmic Discretion’ & Automation in EU Border Control\",\"authors\":\"Amanda Musco Eklund\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718166-12340152\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) will profile visa- exempt third-country nationals using a screening rules algorithm to make automated predictive risk assessments. By using the screening rules algorithm as a case study, this article analyses if the ETIAS Regulation, and the legal safeguards it establishes for the decision-making process, comply with formal and substantive legality requirements as defined by the Venice Commission and the Court of Justice of the European Union. Three legality challenges are identified: [1] The regulatory design of ETIAS raises issues in relation to the foreseeability, clarity and accessibility of law, as well as insufficient limits to discretion. [2] The ETIAS screening rules algorithm represents a development towards a new form of arbitrariness through ‘algorithmic discretion’. [3] The safeguard of manual (human) processing in case of a ‘hit’ is not a panacea for the identified legality challenges.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Migration and Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Migration and Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340152\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Migration and Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340152","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

欧洲旅行信息和授权系统(ETIAS)将使用筛选规则算法对免签证第三国国民进行自动预测风险评估。本文以筛选规则算法为案例,分析ETIAS法规及其为决策过程建立的法律保障是否符合威尼斯委员会和欧盟法院定义的形式和实体合法性要求。b[1] ETIAS的监管设计提出了与法律的可预见性、明确性和可及性有关的问题,以及对自由裁量权的限制不足。[2] ETIAS筛选规则算法代表了通过“算法自由裁量权”向一种新形式的任意性发展。[3]在“命中”的情况下,人工(人工)处理的保障并不是解决已确定的合法性挑战的灵丹妙药。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Rule of Law Challenges of ‘Algorithmic Discretion’ & Automation in EU Border Control
The European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) will profile visa- exempt third-country nationals using a screening rules algorithm to make automated predictive risk assessments. By using the screening rules algorithm as a case study, this article analyses if the ETIAS Regulation, and the legal safeguards it establishes for the decision-making process, comply with formal and substantive legality requirements as defined by the Venice Commission and the Court of Justice of the European Union. Three legality challenges are identified: [1] The regulatory design of ETIAS raises issues in relation to the foreseeability, clarity and accessibility of law, as well as insufficient limits to discretion. [2] The ETIAS screening rules algorithm represents a development towards a new form of arbitrariness through ‘algorithmic discretion’. [3] The safeguard of manual (human) processing in case of a ‘hit’ is not a panacea for the identified legality challenges.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Migration and Law is a quarterly journal on migration law and policy with specific emphasis on the European Union, the Council of Europe and migration activities within the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe. This journal differs from other migration journals by focusing on both the law and policy within the field of migration, as opposed to examining immigration and migration policies from a wholly sociological perspective. The Journal is the initiative of the Centre for Migration Law of the University of Nijmegen, in co-operation with the Brussels-based Migration Policy Group.
期刊最新文献
The ‘Border Security’ Concept in EU Law EU Boots on the Ground and Effective Judicial Protection against Frontex’s Operational Powers in Return: Lessons from Case T‑600/21 When Do Union Citizens and Their Families Have the Right to Equal Treatment on Grounds of Nationality in EU Law? The Fiction of Non-entry in European Migration Law: Its Implications on the Rights of Asylum Seekers and Irregular Migrants at European Borders Derogations in Exchange of Increased Responsibility: How Can This Fix the Broken Promise for More Solidarity in the EU?
×
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