 Automated law enforcement: perfect vision or dystopia?Antje von Ungern-Sternberg Chapter Chapter 13 in Research Handbook on the Law of Artificial Intelligence, 2025, pp 250-274 from Edward Elgar Publishing Abstract: Technological progress allows some to dream of automated law enforcement - of a world in which breaches of the law are prevented by digital means. Examples are upload filters used by platforms to prevent illegal content from being put online, or a car that operates only if the driver is fit and sober. Without downplaying the importance of comprehensive compliance with the law, this chapter focuses on possible detrimental aspects of automated law enforcement and on the existing (European) legal framework of automated law enforcement. Summing up its potential negative consequences, automated law enforcement affects individual rights and interests (data protection and privacy, procedural burdens, rights curtailed by overenforcement), it impedes legal change and flexibility, it increases the power of digital companies and - possibly - the executive branch, and it replaces law as a voluntary, trust-based societal order by technical solutions. The tour d’horizon of the legal framework makes clear that legislation and fundamental rights set limits: for example, data protection shields against certain forms of surveillance, profiling and automation. Whereas, procedural rights (like human oversight and human review) and material rights (like freedom of expression or information) strengthen the position of the alleged potential lawbreaker, procedural rights should prevent overenforcement, and undue burdens of legal disputes, and help control the power of law enforcement actors like platforms or state authorities. General considerations should further guide the policy on automated law enforcement. Summarising, societies do have an interest in legitimate breaches of the law (and must not prevent ‘legal breaches’ of the law like whistleblowing), however, they should not reorient their law enforcement mode from reaction to prevention without careful reflection. In this way, societies should preserve law as an order that remains open to change and continues to be based on (predominantly) voluntary compliance and mutual trust. Keywords: Automated law enforcement; Compliance; Data protection; Fundamental right; Trust; Artificial intelligence (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:elg:eechap:22539_13 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Chapters from Edward Elgar Publishing |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.