摘要
随着人工智能、互联网等新兴数字技术在国家治理中的应用发展,以数据和算法为核心的自动化技术在行政裁量中的应用日渐广泛。自动化技术在政务服务领域的运用,具有提升行政裁量效能与规范裁量权行使的显著优势,但也存在着一定的挑战,如当事人的陈述申辩权被压缩、行政主体的裁量决策权被篡夺、个案正义无法实现等。基于此,有必要对自动化行政裁量进行风险治理,具体包括:建立类案推送系统与特殊情形人工介入双轨协作模式,明确主体权限分配、坚持行政主体的首要地位,以法律保留框定自动化裁量范围等。遵循现代行政法治原理,确保自动化裁量在行政法治框架下做出,推进依法行政。
With the application and development of emerging digital technologies such as artificial intelligence and the internet in national governance,automation technologies centering on data and algorithms are widely applied in administrative discretion.The application of automation technology in the field of government affairs and service has significant advantages in improving the efficiency of administrative discretion and regulating the exercise of discretion.However,there are also some challenges,such as the reduction of the parties’right of statement and defense,the usurpation of the discretion and decision-making power of the administrative subject,and the inability to achieve individual justice.Therefore,it is necessary to take measures to manage the risks of automation of administrative discretion,which includes establishing a dual-track collaboration model of push systems for similar cases and human intervention in special cases,clarifying the allocation of subject authority,upholding the principal position of administrative subjects,and keeping and defining the scope of automated discretion by law,etc.It is also necessary to follow the principles of modern administrative rule of law to ensure that automated discretion is made under the framework of administrative rule of law and promote administration in accordance with the law.
作者
刘旭行
许双全
Liu Xuhang;Xu Shuangquan(Hebei University,Baoding,Hebei 071000,China)
出处
《漯河职业技术学院学报》
2022年第6期66-71,共6页
Journal of Luohe Vocational Technical College
基金
国家社会科学基金一般项目“行政不作为治理研究”(17BFX043)
河北省保定市司法局科研项目“十四五时期建设法治政府、推进法治保定建设思路举措研究”(070909921607)和“《法治保定建设规划(2021—2025年)》《保定市法治社会建设实施方案(2021—2025年)》《法治保定分工》《法治社会分工》编制研究”(070909921608)。
关键词
人工智能
自动化行政自裁量
陈述申辩
个案正义
artificial intelligence
automated administrative discretion
statement and defense
individual justice