Administrative Law’s response to emerging technological challenges
⚖️ Administrative Law and Emerging Technological Challenges
Overview
Administrative law governs how public bodies exercise power and make decisions. With the rapid growth of digital technology, AI, surveillance, big data, automated decision-making, and platform regulation, administrative law has had to evolve in order to:
Ensure transparency and accountability in government technology use.
Protect individual rights, including privacy and due process.
Regulate automated decisions affecting people's legal status or benefits.
Ensure that public bodies do not act ultra vires (beyond their legal powers).
🔍 Key Technological Challenges in Administrative Law
Automated Decision-Making (e.g., welfare, visa, or police risk assessments)
Mass Surveillance and Privacy
AI Algorithms in Public Administration
Social Media and Platform Regulation
Freedom of Information in a Digital Age
📚 Key Cases and Detailed Explanations
1. R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police (2020)
Facts:
South Wales Police used automated facial recognition technology (AFR) in public spaces to identify individuals on a watchlist. Edward Bridges, a civil liberties campaigner, challenged its legality under human rights and data protection law.
Issue:
Did the use of AFR technology by police violate privacy rights and fail to meet administrative law standards?
Holding:
The Court of Appeal ruled that the use of facial recognition technology was unlawful.
Reasoning:
The police had no clear legal framework governing the use of AFR.
It interfered with Article 8 (right to privacy).
There was insufficient oversight or safeguards to prevent arbitrary interference with individual rights.
Impact:
This was a landmark judgment demonstrating that administrative use of technology must:
Have a legal basis,
Be proportionate, and
Include adequate safeguards.
2. R (Catt) v Association of Chief Police Officers (2015)
Facts:
Mr. Catt was monitored by police for attending peaceful protests. His personal data was retained in a police database, even though he had not committed any crimes.
Issue:
Was the retention of personal data by police a breach of administrative powers and Article 8 ECHR?
Holding:
The Supreme Court upheld the data retention, finding it lawful.
Reasoning:
The retention pursued a legitimate purpose: preventing disorder and crime.
Though it interfered with privacy, it was proportionate.
Impact:
The case shows how courts assess data retention by public authorities, balancing state interests with individual rights under administrative and human rights law.
3. R (on the application of Edward) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2021) – Use of Algorithms in Visa Applications
Facts:
The Home Office used an algorithmic system to "stream" visa applications by risk level (green, amber, red), which could influence processing speed or scrutiny.
Issue:
Was the use of an algorithm in visa decisions discriminatory and lacking transparency?
Holding:
After legal pressure, the Home Office agreed to scrap the algorithm and review its use of automated systems.
Reasoning:
The claim alleged algorithmic bias (e.g., red-flagging based on nationality).
There was lack of transparency, raising administrative law concerns.
Impact:
This case illustrates:
The need for explainable decision-making in automated systems.
How procedural fairness applies even to non-human decisions.
4. R (Miller) v Prime Minister (No. 2) [2019] — Digital Government and Accountability
Facts:
Although not a tech case per se, Miller II highlighted the role of administrative law in holding the executive to account when proroguing Parliament—decisions increasingly made in digital and political environments.
Issue:
Was the Prime Minister’s advice to prorogue Parliament justiciable and unlawful?
Holding:
The Supreme Court held that the Prime Minister acted unlawfully because the prorogation had the effect of frustrating Parliament’s constitutional functions.
Relevance to Tech:
In an era where political communication and influence occur digitally (e.g., through social media), the judicial review of executive action remains central.
Impact:
This case reinforces the court’s willingness to scrutinize executive power, even as it intersects with digital-age governance.
5. R (Open Rights Group & Others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2021) — Data Retention and Surveillance
Facts:
Challenge to government rules on mass retention of internet and phone records under the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA), often referred to as the "Snoopers' Charter."
Issue:
Was the regime allowing indiscriminate data retention by public authorities compliant with EU and human rights law?
Holding:
The Court held that the indiscriminate retention of communication data without independent authorization was unlawful.
Reasoning:
Violated Article 8 (privacy).
Lacked proper safeguards and oversight.
Demonstrated the tension between national security and individual rights.
Impact:
This case emphasized that technologically-enabled surveillance must be:
Based on clear legal authority,
Justified by necessity,
Subject to oversight and transparency.
🧠 Themes Emerging from These Cases
| Theme | How Administrative Law Responds |
|---|---|
| Automated Decision-Making | Demands transparency, fairness, and reviewability of algorithmic decisions. |
| Surveillance and Data Retention | Requires clear legal basis, proportionality, and respect for privacy rights. |
| Facial Recognition and AI | Must comply with human rights and data protection; oversight is essential. |
| Digital Government Accountability | Courts remain vigilant about executive overreach, even in digital contexts. |
| Algorithmic Bias and Discrimination | Administrative law applies equality and fairness standards to digital systems. |
✅ Conclusion
Administrative law plays a critical and evolving role in addressing the legal challenges posed by emerging technologies. Courts are now tasked with:
Applying traditional principles (like legality, fairness, proportionality) to new tech contexts;
Ensuring that automated or AI-assisted decisions by public authorities remain lawful and accountable;
Upholding transparency, especially when public authorities use secretive or opaque algorithms;
Protecting human rights like privacy and free expression in the digital age.
As public administration becomes increasingly digitized, administrative law remains the first line of defense against misuse of technology by the state.
RELATED Blog
0 comments