HEADLINE OF THE ATICLE: – IS DEMOCRACY BEING AUTOMATED DUE TO ALGORITHMIC GOVERNANCE AND POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT?
Author: -Divya Khatri, B.A.LL.B., Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Sirsa, Haryana.
TO THE POINT
If every citizen sees a different version of political reality, how can the principle of electoral fairness be maintained? This question may sound ultra-modern, but it shows a real transformation in the political, democratic and constitutional structure. There is an urgent need for governance in political advertisement by AI-driven tools because currently the algorithm is not only assisting in the governance, but it has also started governing. Algorithms are being used by the government so that they can determine who is eligible and suitable for receiving welfare services and who can better maintain the border stewardship. Algorithms inspect the data in large quantities with speed and effectiveness, but with such efficiency there comes a loss of transparency in the system, which raises the serious issues about due process of law and procedural fairness. Systems are complex, and the common public cannot understand them perfectly, and they remain unaware of the fact that how the decisions that affect their lives so deeply are made. Presently, the algorithm is not only ruling what we see, but it also governs how we decide things. Since the government takes most of the decisions, and campaigns by political parties use the personal data so that they can target the public by their upcoming policies according to their priorities, violating right to privacy. It is one of the hidden transformations that seeks to understand if the votes are cast voluntarily or manipulated by machines.
ABSTRACT
As of now, in the twenty-first century, we can not only relate democracy only to voting and representation; it is also about data, algorithms, and oblivious decision-makers. Most of the countries are currently using AI to make decisions in the context of policies, welfare benefits, and immigration, and some of them even use it for judicial purposes. Political campaigns are using the personal data of the public to shape voter behaviour hastily, often without informed consent which is against data protection laws. These exercises raise serious questions about controlling the decision-making process in a democracy. Are citizens still participating in voting voluntarily, or are their decisions influenced by algorithms, or are machines governing everything? In this article, we will analyse the constitutional rights, case laws, national legal framework, proof, use of legal jargon, international legal spectrum, data privacy, ethical concerns, algorithmic transparency, political advertisement, etc. in a detailed version. By investigating current scenarios and suggesting reforms that are totally practical, this article makes every reader rethink the future of democracy in the era of Artificial Intelligence.
USE OF LEGAL JARGON
In this article, terms like Electoral fairness, Due process of law, Procedural laws, Informed consent, Algorithmic governance, Data privacy, right to privacy, AI, Chilling effect are used.
ELECTORAL FAIRENESS– Electoral fairness is a constitutional and legal principle according to which every voter has equal opportunity to cast a free, informed or meaningful vote without any manipulation or influence.
DUE PROCESS OF LAW– It is a fundamental constitutional principle that the state must follow fair, just, or reasonable procedures that affect a person’s life, liberty, or property.
PROCEDURAL LAWS–Procedural laws provide procedure so that rights can be enforced and defended such as CRPC, CPC etc.
INFORMED CONSENT– This is a significant legal and ethical principle according to which any person’s data, body, rights cannot be affected without that person’s clear, fully informed permission.
ALGORITHMIC GOVERNANCE– Algorithmic governance means using AI or computer algorithms and taking decisions that were previously taken by humans such as who should get welfare benefits, which news will come in your feed, or which ad should be shown to which voter.
DATA PRIVACY– It is a legal principle that guarantees the right to control, collect, use and store an individual’s personal information.
RIGHT TO PRIVACY– This is a fundamental right under Article 21 that gives every individual the right to exercise his or her personal information, body, and choice without any unlawful interference.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE– In law and policy, it refers to computer systems or algorithms that can perform tasks that humans would normally perform.
THE PROOF
INDIAN LEGAL FRAMEWORK
Understanding the article from multidimensional standpoints: –
Niti Aayog’s perspective: – The Indian government is not unaware about the dangers to democracy and governance. NITI AAYOG’S DISCUSSION PAPER ON NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE was introduced, the development of “AI FOR ALL” in 2018 but it lacks binding effect and proper regulatory structures. India does not have proper AI law that raise serious issues about right to privacy and the protection of legal rights.
Information Technology Act 2000: – The IT ACT is one of the significant laws for the regulation of cyber activities and prevent the misuse of personal data. It does not directly deal with the algorithmic governance or AI, but some topics are indirectly relevant to it. Sections 43A, 66,66C, 66E, 69,79 Of information technology act that deals with compensation in case of failure to protect data, offences related to computer, identity theft, privacy violation, supervisory power of government, intermediary liability are relevant to regulation of algorithm and digital democracy.
Digital Personal Data Protection Act: – DPDP has introduced that the no data will be processed without the consent of the person, but mainly targeting based on data at micro level generally remains without regulated. In this manner, citizen is influenced without knowing facts, violating the fundamental right of privacy.
INTERNATIONAL LEGAL SPECTRUM
EU AI ACT
It ensures that democracy must be protected from an unregulated algorithm.
COUNCIL OF EUROPE CONVENTION ON AI
Fifty countries signed this convention in September 2024, and the biggest focus of this treaty was to handle AI governance according to the human right framework. Its main purpose is to make sure that artificial intelligence must comply with the rule of law, democratic values and the most profound human rights.AI should not only use just technological logic, but it must also subscribe to basic democratic principles.
TCPA [TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, USA]
It works as a regulatory agency in the USA like how political parties and companies can use text messages, robotic calls, and protect citizens from unsolicited political communication.
COMPOS AND ALGORITHMIC BIAS
Correctional offender management profiling for alternative sanctions is a tool whose main intended function is to predict if offender will commit the crime again, it was used in courts and is significant because it shows that algorithm can be unfair in case it is use in election, and it can violate the legal and constitutional rights of the citizens.
HART’S RULE OF RECOGNITION
H.L.A HART was a renowned legal philosopher, According to Him, laws are valid only if accepted by public and the government officials. Utilization of AI without any proper law is against the principle of constitutional morality.
UNO’S PERSPECTIVE AND GLOBAL TECH STANDARD
The United Nation Secretary-General’s roadmap for digital cooperation seeks to promote universal digital rights, transparency in algorithmic use, guidelines that prevent the manipulation based on AI.
CASE LAWS [NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL]
JUSTICE K.S. PUTTASWAMY V. UNION OF INDIA (2017)
It is one of the most landmark cases in the history of India. It shows that AI based targeted advertisement may violate the fundamental right of the constitution and recognize right to privacy as fundamental right.
BENETT COLEMON AND CO.VS UNION OF INDIA [AIR 1973 SC 106]
The Indian Government imposed newsprint control policies so that it could manage the shortage of paper. This restricted newspapers as to in how many pages they can cover the news. In this case, the Supreme Court of India gave a judgement in favour of Bennett Coleman stated that it is directly against the freedom of press, and indirectly controlling the circulation of the newspaper and the court said that freedom of press is the freedom of both journalist and freedom of reader to obtain information.
FACEBOOK VS DUGUID [592 U.S.A (2021)]
Naoh Duguid sued Facebook under TCPA and argued that Facebook repeatedly sends him text messages about suspicious login attempts without his consent. The USA Supreme Court gave judgement in favor of Facebook and said that Facebook stores numbers in a database and does not use a random number generator and hence does not violate TCPA.
ANIMAL DEFENDER INTERNATION V. UK [2013]
The European court of Human Rights gave judgement in favour of the government of United Kingdom and stated that restriction was justified under article ten clause two that allows limitations on the free expression so that democracy can be protected.
DELFI AS VS ESTONIA (2015)
The European court of Human Rights ruled that Delfi was liable for the defamatory comments posted by users because of non availability of measures to prevent or remove hateful comments and it did not violate fundamental right of freedom of expression.
SUGGESTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES
Enactment of strong AI regulation law.
To strengthen the data protection laws and privacy safeguards.
Transparency in algorithmic audits.
Regulations of AI based political targeting.
To foster digital literacy
Development of AI principles in ethical manner.
Strengthening international cooperation.
CONCLUSION
In today’s modern era, democracy is not only defined by speeches, pronunciamientoes or rallies but lines of code, algorithms and AI also have a huge contribution in it. Algorithmic governance and AI based political advertisement have brought tremendous efficiency, but it has also exposed many limitations in privacy, free speech and electoral fairness. If the algorithms are not checked then it will decide which news we have to watch, which leaders we must trust and whom to vote for. It threatens free choice and AI intelligence micro targets millions of people. Cases like Puttaswamy, Loomis and Delfi show that the courts are aware about these risks, but only the judicial Interventions alone are not enough. To preserve democracy, a balance will have to be maintained in the legal framework and algorithmic transparency will have to be brought. Hence, there is a substantial need for implementation of strong AI laws.
FAQ
What is Algorithmic Governance?
Algorithmic governance means using AI or computer algorithms and taking decisions that were previously taken by humans such as who should get welfare benefits, which news will come in your feed, or which ad should be shown to which voter.
What are the laws in India that regulate algorithm based political ads?
Currently, there is no specific law for algorithmic ads whereas some parts of IT ACT, REPRESENTATION OF PEOPLE ACT, DATA PROTECTION ACT is still applicable, but there is no direct framework, and this is the reason why people make demands for strong AI implementation laws.
Can a social media company be punished for spreading fake political news?
Global cases like Delfi vs. Estonia, shows that platforms can be held responsible in case they fail to remove the defamatory content whereas in India, social media companies are protected as intermediaries.
What should be done to protect voters from algorithmic manipulation?
Voters should verify political ads before sharing, should use privacy settings, read multiple trusted sources and most importantly they should be aware of how their data is used.
REFERENCES
- EU Artificial Intelligence Act—European commission
- Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
- Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid (2021) — U.S. Supreme Court
- UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (2021)
