COMPENSATORY JUSTICE AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v23.5665Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Compensatory Justice, Public International Law, Algorithmic Liability, Legal GapsAbstract
The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in areas like trade, healthcare, and the courts has made it harder to use compensatory justice under public international law. AI systems don't have legal personality as conventional legal actors do, but their judgements are having more and more of an effect on rights, duties, and results that affect people in other countries. This brings up a big question: who is responsible when algorithmic decisions hurt people, and how can victims get fair compensation? This study looks at how compensatory justice and AI relate to each other in the context of international law. It looks into how international legal documents, like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and relevant court decisions, deal with or don't deal with the liability and reparation systems that apply to harm caused by autonomous or semi-autonomous systems. The study shows that the current frameworks are not good enough for assigning blame, especially when it comes to AI systems that are not clear about who is responsible or are decentralised. Three real-world examples show how this works: AI-driven credit scoring in international finance, diagnostic tools in healthcare services across borders, and algorithmic risk assessments in court decisions. Each example shows a different problem that comes up when trying to deliver compensatory justice across different areas. The paper ends with strategic legal suggestions for making treaties clearer, creating soft law tools, and encouraging global cooperation for algorithmic governance. The goal is to let people who have been hurt by AI seek justice through international law. This will make sure that the law is fair and consistent in a world where technology is changing quickly.
References
A. G. Antony and F. Karim, “Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights: Challenges and Prospects in International Law,” International Comparative Law Review, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 123–145, 2021.
B. Mittelstadt et al., “The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate,” Big Data&Society, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1–21, 2016.
B. Wagner, “Algorithmic regulation and the rule of law,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, vol. 376, no. 2128, pp. 1–14, 2018.
C. Crootof, “A Comparative Analysis of International AI Governance Models,” Yale Journal of International Law, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 1–40, 2022.
D. K. Citron and F. Pasquale, “The scored society: Due process for automated predictions,” Washington Law Review, vol. 89, pp. 1–33, 2014.
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, “Getting the future right – Artificial intelligence and fundamental rights,” FRA Report, 2020.
Fair Trials, “Automated decision-making in criminal justice systems,” Report, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.fairtrials.org
International Law Commission, “Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts,” 2001, UN Doc. A/56/10.
International Telecommunication Union (ITU), “AI for Good: Technical Standards,” Geneva, 2022.
J. E. Cohen, “Algorithmic Discrimination and the European Union,” Fordham Law Review, vol. 89, no. 2, pp. 389–414, 2020.
J. E. Viñuales, “Advisory Opinions of the ICJ and International Law-Making,” Leiden Journal of International Law, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 917–934, 2012.
K. Crawford and V. Schultz, “AI systems and structural inequality: The case of digital credit scoring,” Technology and Society, vol. 64, pp. 1–12, 2021.
L. Floridi et al., “AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations,” Minds and Machines, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 689–707, 2018.
M. A. Finck, “Automated Decision-Making and Administrative Law: Between Efficiency and Legitimacy,” Modern Law Review, vol. 83, no. 5, pp. 761–791, 2020.
M. Milanovic, “State Responsibility for Non-State Actors: A Path to Accountability for Human Rights Violations,” Human Rights Law Review, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 129–159, 2012.
OECD, “Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence,” OECD Legal Instruments, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0449
Permanent Court of International Justice, “Case Concerning the Factory at Chorzów (Claim for Indemnity) (Merits),” Judgment No. 13, 1928 PCIJ (ser. A) No. 17.
R. Binns, “Algorithmic accountability and public reason,” Philosophy&Technology, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 543–556, 2018.
R. Daniels, “AI in Global Health: A Legal Perspective,” Journal of Law, Medicine&Ethics, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 357–368, 2020.
S. Wachter, B. Mittelstadt, and C. Russell, “Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR,” Harvard Journal of Law&Technology, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 841–887, 2018.
T. Christiano, “The Rule of Compensation in International Law,” Ethics&International Affairs, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 25–45, 2017.
UN General Assembly, “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,” 1966, United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 999, p. 171.
UNESCO, “Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://unesdoc.unesco.org
United Nations Human Rights Council, “The right to privacy in the digital age,” A/HRC/48/31, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.ohchr.org
United Nations, “Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights,” HR/PUB/11/04, 2011.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
I (we) submit this article which is original and unpublished, of my (our) own authorship, to the evaluation of the Veredas do Direito Journal, and agree that the related copyrights will become exclusive property of the Journal, being prohibited any partial or total copy in any other part or other printed or online communication vehicle dissociated from the Veredas do Direito Journal, without the necessary and prior authorization that should be requested in writing to Editor in Chief. I (we) also declare that there is no conflict of interest between the articles theme, the author (s) and enterprises, institutions or individuals.
I (we) recognize that the Veredas do Direito Journal is licensed under a CREATIVE COMMONS LICENSE.
Licença Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
