Recording of webinar on 'Digitalization and AI decision-making in administrative law proceedings'

The Centre for Global Law and Innovation of the University of Bristol Law School and the Faculty of Law at Universidade Católica Portuguesa co-organised an online workshop to discuss emerging issues in digitalization and AI decision-making in administrative law proceedings. I had the great pleasure of chairing it and I think quite a few important issues for further discussion and research were identified. The speakers kindly agreed to share a recording of the session (available here), of which details follow:

Digitalization and AI decision-making in administrative law proceedings

This is a hot area of legal and policy development that has seen an acceleration in the context of the covid-19 pandemic. Emerging research finds points of friction in the simple transposition of administrative law and existing procedures to the AI context, as well as challenges and shortcomings in the judicial review of decisions supported (or delegated) to an AI.

While more and more attention is paid to the use of AI by the public sector, key regulatory proposals such as the European Commission’s Proposal for an Artificial Intelligence Act would largely leave this area to (self)regulation via codes of practice, with the exception of public assistance benefits and services. Self-regulation is also largely the approach taken by the UK in its Guide to using artificial intelligence in the public sector, and the UK courts seem reluctant to engage with the technology underpinning automated decision-making. It is thus arguable that a regulatory gap is increasingly visible and that new solutions and regulatory approaches are required.

The panellists in this workshop covered a range of topics concerning transparency, data protection, automation of decision-making, and judicial review. The panel included (in order of participation):

• Dr Marta Vaz Canavarro Portocarrero de Carvalho, Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law of Universidade Católica Portuguesa, specialising in administrative law, and member of the Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa (Portuguese Administrative Law Arbitration Centre).

• Dr Filipa Calvão, President of the Comissão Nacional de Proteção de Dados (Portuguese Data Protection Authority) since 2012, and Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law of Universidade Católica Portuguesa.

• Dr Pedro Cerqueira Gomes, Assistant Professor at Universidade Católica Portuguesa and Lawyer at Cerqueira Gomes & Associados, RL, specialising in administrative law and public procurement, and author of EU Public Procurement and Innovation - the innovation partnership procedure and harmonization challenges (Edward Elgar 2021).

• Mr Kit Fotheringham, Teaching Associate and postgraduate research student at the University of Bristol Law School. His doctoral thesis is on administrative law, specifically relating to the use of algorithms, machine learning and other artificial intelligence technologies by public bodies in automated decision-making procedures.

Essay competition. Enter to win a copy of the Commentary on Directive 2014/24/EU

I have two spare copies of the hot off the press Commentary on Directive 2014/24/EU I co-edited with Roberto Caranta. So I thought I would put them to good use through an essay competition. Here are the details on how to enter to win a copy (shipped for free to an address of your choice). I hope many of you will be tempted to enter!

Essay competition: ‘If I could change one thing in public procurement regulation, I would …’

Essays of up to 1,000 words are invited on the topic above. Essays must be written in English, sent as body text in an email to a.sanchez-graells@bristol.ac.uk, and be received by Monday 20 December 2021 9am GMT.

Entries can be submitted to the standard track (for practitioners and academics), or the student track (for those currently enrolled in undergraduate or postgraduate programmes, including PhD programmes). Submissions need to indicate which track they relate to. Otherwise, they will be entered to the standard track.

Co-authored entries are permitted, provided the authors understand that only one copy of the Commentary will be awarded per winning essay (standard and student track). Where essays are co-authored by students and non-students, they will be entered to the standard track.

The essays will be judged on the basis of the procurement insight they show, the persuasiveness of the argument and their academic quality, in particular regarding engagement with existing law, case law and scholarship. I will judge the essays personally and my decision will be final. Entrants in the student track will be provided with written feedback on request. No feedback will be available for standard track submissions. I reserve the possibility of declaring one or both tracks deserted (but certainly hope this will not be the case!).

Each of the two winning essays (standard and student track) will be awarded a copy of the Commentary and will be published in the blog. All entrants authorise their publication when they submit their essays as a condition for participation. Runner-ups can be published in the blog with express agreement of the author/s.

I look forward to reading the essays. For any queries, please email me: a.sanchez-graells@bristol.ac.uk. Good luck!