Transparency, Compliance, And Contestability When Code Is(n't) Law

TL;DR

This paper explores how transparency technologies can enhance accountability and contestability of code as law, bridging technical security measures with legal principles through real-world case studies.

Contribution

It introduces transparency-enhancing technologies as security mechanisms that support legal accountability and contestability of code, contrasting them with other accountability methods.

Findings

Transparency tech can support legal processes

Case studies illustrate practical application

Accountability mechanisms must balance security and legal principles

Abstract

Both technical security mechanisms and legal processes serve as mechanisms to deal with misbehaviour according to a set of norms. While they share general similarities, there are also clear differences in how they are defined, act, and the effect they have on subjects. This paper considers the similarities and differences between both types of mechanisms as ways of dealing with misbehaviour, and where they interact with each other. Taking into consideration the idea of code as law, we discuss accountability mechanisms for code, and how they must relate to both security principles and legal principles. In particular, we identify the ability to contest norms enforced by code as an important part of accountability in this context. Based on this analysis, we make the case for transparency enhancing technologies as security mechanisms that can support legal processes, in contrast to other types of accountability mechanisms for code. We illustrate this through two examples based on recent court cases that involved Post Office in the United Kingdom and Uber in the Netherlands, and discuss some practical considerations.