Algorithmic Policing and International Law: Critical Realities in Data-Driven Corporates and Governments over AI Realms

Abstract

Algorithmic policing is an important development in the field of Law and Technology, which has subjected to a relevant instrumentality in developed and developing economies. Beyond the crude material realities of machine learning, the role of algorithmic policing has certainly changed and has questioned the basic role of big data in its structure and resonance with the principles of justice. Also, it has contributed towards an acute form of resilient effect in economies such as China, US and some EU countries, where the role of AI-based systems has surpassed the legal barriers of data protection legislations, and has certainly invoked concerns for corporates and individuals, where rule of law is not limited to mere subjected principles of natural justice. In fact, algorithmic policing raises some imperative questions over the role of international human rights law (or IHRL) and has impacted individuals in cases of studies on customer experience and data dimensionality, where corporates are accountable and reliant over the frugalities in international cyberspace regarding the role and scope of AI-based entities. The plural nature of data processing raises significant issues over the dimensional variation of privacy intrusions that AI-based parameters are applied and instrumented in developed and developing economies. It has a significant role yet lacked opinio juris in international law and regional legal regimes, where it has become uncertain to restrict the dynamism of data-driven modalities existent under artificial intelligence. This paper thus raises legal issues over algorithmic policing in the sphere of international law and human rights, suggests solutions with regards the status of an AI in the schemata of algorithmic policing regarding privacy intrusions and provides case analysis of algorithmic policing as soft violations of definite human rights and privacies with reference to China, the EU and US.

Keywords: international law, algorithmic policing, machine learning, self-determination, customer experience