The Inscrutable Code? The Deficient Scrutiny Problem of Automated Government

This paper argues that automated decision-making in UK public administration lacks adequate scrutiny, and proposes regulatory safeguards through mandatory pre-deployment impact assessments and algorithmic auditing to strengthen accountability in Parliament and the courts.

Active

Since 2024

Oxford, UK

Public administration in the United Kingdom increasingly features automated decision-making. From predictive policing and prisoner categorisation, to asylum applications and tenancy relationships, automated government exists across various domains. This paper examines an underlying issue concerning government automated decision-making systems: the lack of public scrutiny they receive across pre- to post-deployment. Branches of the state tasked with scrutinising government, namely Parliament and the courts, appear outmoded to address this problem. These circumstances prompt a concern of where the public can expect safeguards from government overreach manifested through computer software. Two regulatory solutions are proposed. First, mandating pre-deployment impact assessments of automated decision-making systems intended for use by government, either during their design, or before procurement. Second, incorporating algorithmic auditing as part of reinforcing the duty of candour in judicial review, so as to better inform courts about specific systems and the data underpinning them.