Beyond Territoriality: Jurisdiction, Accountability, and Human Rights in Algoritmic Governance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22437/q8zks556Keywords:
algorithmic governance, iccpr, global administrative law, digital legal order, algorithmic due process.Abstract
Background: The evolution of algorithmic governance has created an operational gap regarding the application of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to decision-making systems. This gap does not reflect a structural inadequacy of the ICCPR; rather, it highlights the need to translate the treaty’s guarantee specifically regarding privacy (Article 17), freedom of expression (Article 19), effective remedy (Article 2(3)), and fair procedure (Article 14) into international legal standards for algorithmic governance. Methodology: This research employs a normative legal method with doctrinal and prescriptive approaches, examining ICCPR obligations through comparative case studies of Robodebt (Australia), SyRI (the Netherlands), and Indonesian practices (DTKS, IKD, and SSCASN). Objectives: This study analyzes the application of ICCPR guarantees within algorithmic governance to develop a doctrinal operational framework for the digital legal order, aiming to ensure the effectiveness of these guarantees through doctrinal expansion and interpretive adaptation. FindingsResearch indicates that the primary issue lies not in any normative inadequacy of the ICCPR, but rather in the absence of concrete procedural and institutional standards for its implementation within an algorithmic context. Domestic algorithmic systems give rise to compliance failures regarding transparency, explainability, contestability, and effective remedy. Meanwhile, the governance of cross-border platforms introduces jurisdictional complexities under Article 2(1), potentially revealing protection gaps between a state's territory and the jurisdiction where a platform is incorporated. Novelty: This research introduces a digital legal order as a framework for prescriptive harmonization based on functional jurisdiction, shared responsibility, and algorithmic due process. Its contribution lies in operationalizing ICCPR obligations into applicable international standards—encompassing the designation of authority, individual explanation, meaningful contestation, substantive review, auditability, and reasoned redress—thereby advancing the doctrinal development of international human rights law in response to digital transformation
References
Abrusci, Elena, and Richard Mackenzie-Gray Scott. “The Questionable Necessity of a New Human Right against Being Subject to Automated Decision-Making.” International Journal of Law and Information Technology 31, no. 2 (2023): 114–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaad013.
Ayalew, Yohannes Eneyew. “A Third-World Critique of the International Human Rights-Based Approach to Content Moderation.” Transnational Legal Theory 16, no. 4 (2025): 546–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2025.2523184.
Bakiner, Onur. “The Promises and Challenges of Addressing Artificial Intelligence with Human Rights.” Big Data & Society 10, no. 2 (2023): 20539517231205476. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517231205476.
Boutin, Bérénice. “State Responsibility in Relation to Military Applications of Artificial Intelligence.” Leiden Journal of International Law 36, no. 1 (2023): 133–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156522000607.
Boutin, Bérénice. “State Responsibility in Relation to Military Applications of Artificial Intelligence.” Leiden Journal of International Law 36, no. 1 (2023): 133–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156522000607.
Cassese, Sabino. “Global Administrative Law: The State of the Art.” International Journal of Constitutional Law 13, no. 2 (2015): 465–68. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mov022.
Chowdhury, Saabiq. “Technology Is Never Neutral: Robodebt and a Human Rights Analysis of Automated Decision-Making on Welfare Recipients.” Australian Journal of Human Rights 30, no. 1 (2024): 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2024.2409620.
Hariansah, Syafri, and Laila Qhistina. “Algorithmic Governance And Democratic Legitimacy: Rethinking Digital Co-Creation in Constitutional Law-Making.” Al-Risalah: Forum Kajian Hukum Dan Sosial Kemasyarakatan 26, no. 1 (2026): 199–216. https://doi.org/10.30631/alrisalah.v26i1.2285.
Hariansah, Syafri, and Laila Qhistina. “Toward Algorithmic Due Process: Constitutional Challenges and Human Rights Risks in Indonesia’s Digital State.” Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia 8, no. 1 (2026): 24–45. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.14710/jphi.v8i1.25-25.
Hildenbrand, Serena. “Robodebt and Novel Data Technologies in the Public Sector: How Human Rights Laws Plug Data Protection Gaps.” The University of Queensland Law Journal, ahead of print, July 14, 2024. https://doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v43i2.8311.
Kingsbury, Benedict, Nico Krisch, and Richard B. Stewart. “The Emergence of Global Administrative Law.” SSRN Electronic Journal, ahead of print, 2005. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.692628.
Kosta, Eleni. “Algorithmic State Surveillance: Challenging the Notion of Agency in Human Rights.” Regulation & Governance 16, no. 1 (2022): 212–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12331.
Ladeur, Karl-Heinz. “Global Administrative Law: A Transnational Perspective.” In The Oxford Handbook of Transnational Law, 1st ed., edited by Peer Zumbansen. Oxford University Press, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197547410.013.7.
Lane, Lottie. “Clarifying Human Rights Standards Through Artificial Intelligence Initiatives.” International and Comparative Law Quarterly 71, no. 4 (2022): 915–44. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589322000380.
McGregor, Lorna, Daragh Murray, and Vivian Ng. “International Human Rights Law As A Framework For Algorithmic Accountability.” International and Comparative Law Quarterly 68, no. 2 (2019): 309–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589319000046.
Milanovic, M. “From Compromise to Principle: Clarifying the Concept of State Jurisdiction in Human Rights Treaties.” Human Rights Law Review 8, no. 3 (2008): 411–48. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngn021.
Muchlinski, Peter. “The Impact of the UN Guiding Principles on Business Attitudes to Observing Human Rights.” Business and Human Rights Journal 6, no. 2 (2021): 212–26. https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2021.14.
Ruggie, John Gerard, Caroline Rees, and Rachel Davis. “Ten Years After: From UN Guiding Principles to Multi-Fiduciary Obligations.” Business and Human Rights Journal 6, no. 2 (2021): 179–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2021.8.
Sarjito, Aris, and Sundring Pantja Djati. Administrative Justice In Algorithm-Based Social Assistance Distribution Systems: A Study Of Digital Transparency In Public Services In Indonesia. 11, no. 2 (2025).
Schissler, Matt. “Beyond Hate Speech and Misinformation: Facebook and the Rohingya Genocide in Myanmar.” Journal of Genocide Research 27, no. 3 (2025): 445–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623528.2024.2375122.
Shurson, Jessica. “Investigative Jurisdiction: The Evolving Limits of Extraterritoriality in Transnational Digital Investigations.” International and Comparative Law Quarterly 74, no. 3 (2025): 675–705. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589325100985.
Suzor, Nicolas. “A Constitutional Moment: How We Might Reimagine Platform Governance.” Computer Law & Security Review 36 (April 2020): 105381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2019.105381.
Teo, Sue Anne. “How Artificial Intelligence Systems Challenge the Conceptual Foundations of the Human Rights Legal Framework.” Nordic Journal of Human Rights 40, no. 1 (2022): 216–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/18918131.2022.2073078.
Van Bekkum, Marvin, and Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius. “Digital Welfare Fraud Detection and the Dutch SyRI Judgment.” European Journal of Social Security 23, no. 4 (2021): 323–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211031257.
Warthon, Margaret. “Restricting Access to AI Decision-Making in the Public Interest: The Justificatory Role of Proportionality and Its Balancing Factors.” Internet Policy Review 13, no. 3 (2024). https://doi.org/10.14763/2024.3.1801.
Wolfsteller, René, and Yingru Li. “Business and Human Rights Regulation After the UN Guiding Principles: Accountability, Governance, Effectiveness.” Human Rights Review 23, no. 1 (2022): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-022-00656-2.
Yeung, Karen. “Algorithmic Regulation: A Critical Interrogation.” Regulation & Governance 12, no. 4 (2018): 505–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12158.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Syafri Hariansah, Angga Aldilla Gussman, Ainulisa Amsyah, Laila Qhistina
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
