With the iterative update of digital technology,the application scope and degree of automated decision-making have been continuously expanded,which has brought serious challenges to the modern administrative rule of law.Although the"right to object to automated decision-making"stipulated in Article 24,Paragraph 3 of the PIPL is relatively crude in structure and the design of the provisions is not flexible enough,it seems to provide a new direction for the study of how to protect the legitimate rights and interests of administrative counterparts in the context of intelligent administration.Embedding the right to refuse automated decision-making in intelligent administration is not only a necessary solution to the asymmetry of power and rights,an inevitable measure for embedding higher-intensity manual intervention in intelligent administration,but also a governance path of"human loop"in automated decision-making.The ban path or the right path is excluded from the scope of the right to object to automated decision-making due to different degrees of limitations.The compromise approach,with its macroscopic,weak confrontation and dynamic advantages,makes up for the limitations of the other two paths,and becomes the approach choice of the right to reject automated decision-making.Under the guidance of the compromise approach,the scope of application of the right to object to automated decision-making should be broadened,the premise of the application of"having a significant impact on personal interests"needs to be delineated,and the connection of the application of the right to object to automated decision-making should be optimized.
intelligent administrationthe right to object to automated decision-making"Man in the loop"a compromise approachrules apply
万方数据
维普
