智能执法中行政相对人知情权的保障路径选择  

Research on the Choice of Protection Paths for the Right to Know of Administrative Counter-parties in Intelligent Law Enforcement

作　　者：蔡健 Cai Jian(Law School of Hainan University,Haikou 570228)

机构地区：[1]海南大学法学院,海南海口570228

出　　处：《中阿科技论坛（中英文）》2024年第1期156-161,共6页China-Arab States Science and Technology Forum

基　　金：海南省研究生创新课题行政“过期之诉”的实证考察与法律治理研究(QHYS2022-11)。

摘　　要：人工智能技术嵌入行政执法,虽然能显著提升行政机关的运行效率,但同时也对行政相对人的权益保护带来了挑战。如何保障智能执法中行政相对人的知情权,成为亟须解决的现实问题。《行政处罚法》第四十一条对非现场执法作了通用规定,明确行政机关应当及时告知当事人违法事实,并采取信息化手段或者其他措施,为当事人查询、陈述和申辩提供便利。但这些规定由于笼统的表述与技术的限制而难以得到彻底落实。文章基于《行政处罚法》第四十一条,梳理智能执法系统决策的形成过程,发现智能执法的数据收集未得到数据主体的知情同意,决策机制的正当性模糊,决策结果缺乏监督;在借鉴和反思了欧盟《通用数据保护条例》中的既有保障路径之后,发现目前的知情权保障路径都在一定程度上忽视了个人权利与公共利益之间的平衡。文章认为,应当从明确知情同意标准、推行全过程的算法解释义务、建立算法监督机制等路径,全方面地保障智能执法中行政相对人的知情权。The application of artificial intelligence into administrative law enforcement can significantly enhance the operational efficiency of administrative agencies,but it also poses challenges to the protection of the rights and interests of administrative counter-parties.In this context,safeguarding the right to know of administrative counter-parties has become an urgent practical problem that needs to be addressed.Article 41 of the Administrative Penalty Law provides general provisions for off-site law enforcement,making it clear that administrative organs should promptly inform the parties of the crime and adopt information technology or other measures to facilitate the parties'inquiries,statements and defenses.However,these regulations are often due to vague expressions and technical limitations.Thus,based on Article 41 of the Administrative Penalty Law,this article reviews the decision-making process of intelligent law enforcement system.It's found that the data collection has not obtained the informed consent of the data subject,the legitimacy of the decision-making mechanism is ambiguous,and the lack of regulation of the decision-making results;After drawing on the existing provisions in the EU General Data Protection Regulation,it was found that the current protection paths have to certain extent neglected the balance between individual rights and public interests.In the end,it's proposed that the right to information of administrative counter-parties should be afeguarded in an all-around way through clear standards for informed consent,implementation of algorithmic interpretation obligations throughout the entire process and establishment of algorithmic supervision mechanisms.

关 键 词：智能执法 行政公开 知情同意 算法监督 

分 类 号：D922.11[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学]