Publikationer

Research | Forskning - peer review

The EU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act has sparked debates about establishing new or expanded information rights for citizens affected by AI-based administrative decision-making (AADM). While some argue that new or expanded information rights to citizens are reasonable and ethically recommendable,… The EU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act has sparked debates about establishing new or expanded information rights for citizens affected by AI-based administrative decision-making (AADM). While some argue that new or expanded information rights to citizens are reasonable and ethically recommendable, others caution that such rights may inhibit innovation. However, as with any public debate, arguments should be grounded in a clear understanding of existing rights enshrined in current regulations. This article conducts a legal dogmatic analysis of the right to good administration in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU Charter) and its constituent information rights, namely the right to consultation, the right to access, and the right to an explanation, to provide a foundation for future debates on new or expanded information rights for citizens affected by AADM. Moreover, this article explores how the transparency provision in Article 13 of the AI Act interacts with these information rights and discusses whether these regulations collectively form a robust legal framework for citizens affected by AADM. Our approach to selecting and examining legal sources mirrors that of the Court of Justice of the European Union, as the Court holds the interpretation privilege of the examined provisions (dogmatic method within legal realism). Læs mere

Research | Forskning - peer review

This paper argues that jurisprudence can offer a relevant contribution to the international debate on the use of artificial intelligence in the public sector. From a legal perspective, a distinction can and should be made between two types of AI-based solutions, namely fact-producing and those that… This paper argues that jurisprudence can offer a relevant contribution to the international debate on the use of artificial intelligence in the public sector. From a legal perspective, a distinction can and should be made between two types of AI-based solutions, namely fact-producing and those that represent a transformation of norms (legislation). Under Danish Administrative Law, mainly the latter solutions must be fully explainable. This distinction might be relevant for other disciplines than jurisprudence and be a contribution to the internationally debated hot topic of whether transparency must be ensured via ethical principles or regulation. Læs mere