Review identifies gaps in legal coverage for automated decision-making and suggests protocol improvements.
With increasing automation within the public administration of Finland during the past two decades, it became clear that there existed a lack of legal basis for automated decision-making. After various legal opinions to that effect, the Parliament corrected the situation by adding to the Administrative Procedure Act a foundational provision and made some other additions to the legislation. The law now covers fully automated decision-making and rules out the use of machine-learning techniques for fully automated decision-making, which is limiting the options for software production to rule-based systems. However, the new regulation does not extend itself to semi-automated systems used for assisting functions, although such systems may have legal implications for individuals. Therefore, the law-maker should create a mandatory protocol that prevents the turning over without full consideration the results achieved by machine-learning applications when used in supporting capacities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Markku; id_orcid 0000-0003-2196-5963 Suksi (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: