E-Government and Digital Administrative Law: Ensuring Due Process in Automated Public Services
Keywords:
E-government, digital administrative law, automated public services, algorithmic decision-making, due process, administrative justice, digital governance, AI in government, transparency, accountabilityAbstract
The rapid expansion of automated systems within public administration has transformed how states deliver services, make decisions, and interact with citizens. As governments increasingly rely on digital identity infrastructures, algorithmic decision-making tools, automated eligibility assessments, and AI-supported administrative processes, new questions arise regarding the preservation of due process in environments where human judgment is often minimized or replaced entirely. This narrative review examines the conceptual foundations, procedural vulnerabilities, and emerging governance models associated with automated public services, drawing on contemporary scholarship to analyze how administrative law must evolve to maintain fairness, legality, transparency, and accountability in digital governance. The article begins by tracing the shift from traditional administrative law—which presumes human-centered decision-making—to digital administrative law, which must accommodate technically complex systems that operate at scale. It identifies core due process challenges associated with automation, including opacity in algorithmic systems, risks of biased or discriminatory outputs, gaps in responsibility and oversight, reductions in opportunities for individuals to be heard, and the expansion of privacy and surveillance risks through integrated data infrastructures. A comparative analysis of legal and regulatory responses across the European Union, United States, United Kingdom, Asia-Pacific, and Middle East demonstrates the diversity of approaches nations have adopted to address these concerns. Building on these insights, the review outlines emerging governance mechanisms designed to embed due process protections within automated systems. These include algorithmic transparency frameworks, auditability requirements, hybrid human–machine oversight models, enhanced procedural rights to explanation and appeal, risk-based regulatory classifications, and ethical design principles for public-sector algorithms. Collectively, these measures illustrate a pathway for ensuring that digital transformation in public administration reinforces, rather than undermines, the foundational principles of administrative justice.
References
Atabekov, A. R. (2023). Areas for Public Functions Implementation by Artificial Intelligence in Russia and the World. Actual Problems of Russian Law, 18(5), 181-185. https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2023.150.5.181-185
Bodemer, O. (2023). Artificial Intelligence in Governance: A Comprehensive Analysis of AI Integration and Policy Development in the German Government. https://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.24639588
Bondarenko, V. (2023). System and Structure of Public Administration. Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence(3), 250-255. https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2023.03.45
Gontarz, I. (2023). Judicial Review of Automated Administrative Decision-Making: The Role of Administrative Courts in the Evaluation of Unlawful Regimes. Elte Law Journal(1), 151-162. https://doi.org/10.54148/eltelj.2023.1.151
Herawati, A. R., Widowati, N., & Maesaroh, M. (2023). Dynamics of Public Service Digitization Study on Case Tracing Information System (SIPP) in Court. Kne Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v8i11.13568
Khromova, Y. (2023). Digitalization of Public Administration in Ukraine: Current Challenges and Synergic Effect. https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-355-2-16
Korvat, O. (2023). Development of Electronic Governance to a Digital Ecosystem. Law and Innovations(2 (42)), 41-45. https://doi.org/10.37772/2518-1718-2023-2(42)-5
Krasivskyy, O. (2023). Specific Features of Public Involvement and Digitalization of Services When Reforming Public Administration During the War. Democratic Governance, 31(1), 12-23. https://doi.org/10.23939/dg2023.01.012
Sun, H. (2023). Regulating Algorithmic Disinformation. The Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts, 46(4). https://doi.org/10.52214/jla.v46i3.11237
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.