To Örebro University

Automated administrative decisions (AADs) have been deployed in the public sector to increase efficiency and accessibility. However, AADs challenge the principles of the rule of law, particularly, the principle of legality (PoL). This chapter examines whether AADs are in compliance with the PoL. In order to adequately answer the question at hand, this chapter first discusses the PoL and its legal force. Secondly, it discusses AADs, their benefits and legal implications in relation to public administration. The chapter, finally, studies the entangled relationship between AADs and the PoL in the public sector and argues for the importance of upholding the PoL in the process of automated decisions made by public authorities. 

This chapter seeks to examine the principle of legal certainty in connection with blockchain technology. It explores whether blockchain technology – featured core operational characteristics – fulfils the rule of law’s principle of legal certainty. The chapter discusses the principle of legal certainty and explores how blockchain technology has been designed to contest legal order and some regulatory norms. The chapter then draws on the notion of legal certainty and assesses the technology’s law/legal-compliance potentials. It finally concludes that blockchain technology theoretically falls short of satisfying the principle of legal certainty and proposes legal remedies to address such a shortcoming. 

This paper seeks to answer whether the use of blockchain technology enhances sustainability in supply chains during e-procurement. This paper takes the issue from a legal perspective and discusses whether the benefits of public e-procurement may constitute possible means to enhance sustainability with the use of blockchain technology. It investigates blockchain technology and its features to improve data protection and transparency in the area of public procurement. It further addresses whether States have the obligation to ensure sustainability in their public e-procurement processes, whilst maintaining data protection and confidentiality. The paper is based on a survey of primary sources of law, best practice and available literature, adopting the legal analytical method. The paper is limited to suggesting the use of blockchain technology to disclose history and processes of suppliers to ensure their alignment with sustainability. It does not attempt to include identified States, rather it adopts a wholistic approach to the issue.

This blogpost discusses communication blackouts in Gaza as a form of Israeli cyberattacks against civilian objects, considering their violent nature in means or effects. It evaluates the legality of such cyberattacks under the principles of distinction and proportionality, in conjunction with the Customary Rule 54: prohibition of attacks against objects indispensable to the survival of civilian population. 

A set of rights and freedoms are protected by constitutions and interpreted by the competent judiciary. The increasing use of information and communication technologies (ICT s) creates new legal challenges to rights and their judicial interpretation. This article aims at analysing the prospects of the Palestinian Supreme Constitutional Court (SCC) concerning digital rights, while considering political and legal challenges. In doing so, it begins with a brief introduction to the concepts of digital right and digital constitutionalism. The article further describes the status of digital rights in Palestine and evaluates the role of the SCC in the adjudication of the constitutionality of the laws in relation to human rights protection on the internet. It finally offers proposals for understanding the necessity for constitutional protection of digital rights in Palestine through judicial review. It argues that the Palestine needs constitutional modernisation to address the legal implications of technologies on human rights.

Despite their pronounced potential, unacceptable risk AI systems, such as facial recognition, have been used as tools for, inter alia, digital surveillance, and policing. This usage raises concerns in relation to the protection of basic freedoms and liberties and upholding the rule of law. This article contributes to the legal discussion by investigating how the law must intervene, control, and regulate the use of unacceptable risk AI systems that concern biometric data from a human-rights and rule of law perspective. In doing so, the article first examines the collection of biometric data and the use of facial recognition technology. Second, it describes the nature of the obligation or duty of states to regulate in relation to new technologies. The article, lastly, assesses the legal implications resulting from the failure of states to regulate new technologies and investigates possible legal remedies. The article uses some relevant EU regulations as an illustrative example.

Early in his writings, Elia Zureik connected Israeli surveillance of Palestinians as an extended conduct of settler colonialism and neoliberal apartheid, arguing that Israel’s Colonial Project in Palestine shows how central surveillance is to the maintenance of that project. More precisely, in his article in 2020: Settler Colonialism, Neoliberalism and Cyber Surveillance: The Case of Israel, he pointed out that the use of new technologies, especially the use of algorithmic predictions and biometrics, including facial recognition, has transformed Israel to a high-tech surveillance state, spreading fear among and tightening its control over the occupied Palestinian people.

Departing from the notion of “cyber surveillance” in relation to control and settler colonialism, and building on Elia’s work, I will address three main points in turn. First: The status of Palestinians under Israeli cyber surveillance and digital oppression. Second: The use of AI-enhanced facial recognition systems to track Palestinians, systematizing massive surveillance and automating harsh restrictions to their rights and freedoms as part of a structural settler colonial oppression. Third: The role of social media platforms in facilitating cyber surveillance and digital oppression. I will conclude with a brief examination of the legality of the deployment of these technologies under international law of occupation.

Environmental crimes in times of war have received comparatively little legal attention in MENA even when there is clear evidence that they are caused by deliberate and belligerent human action. This panel will explorehow international laws and framework account for environmental damage caused by conflict, and how can adequate legal frameworks be created and/or adapted in MENA to hold perpetrators to account?