Both technical security mechanisms and legal processes serve as mechanisms to deal with misbehaviour according to a set of norms. While they share general similarities, there are also clear differences in how they are defined, act, and the effect they have on subjects. This paper considers the similarities and differences between both types of mechanisms as ways of dealing with misbehaviour, and where they interact with each other. Taking into consideration the idea of code as law, we discuss accountability mechanisms for code, and how they must relate to both security principles and legal principles. In particular, we identify the ability to contest norms enforced by code as an important part of accountability in this context. Based on this analysis, we make the case for transparency enhancing technologies as security mechanisms that can support legal processes, in contrast to other types of accountability mechanisms for code. We illustrate this through two examples based on recent court cases that involved Post Office in the United Kingdom and Uber in the Netherlands, and discuss some practical considerations.
翻译:技术安全机制和法律程序都是根据一套规范处理不当行为的机制,虽然它们具有共同的一般相似之处,但在如何界定、采取行动和对主题的影响方面也有明显的差异。本文件认为,这两种机制之间的相似和差异是处理不当行为的方法,是它们相互作用的方式。考虑到法规作为法律的概念,我们讨论守则的问责机制,以及它们与安全原则和法律原则的关系。特别是,我们确定对法规执行的规范提出异议的能力是这方面问责制的一个重要部分。根据这项分析,我们主张提高透明度,将技术作为支持法律程序的安全机制,与其他类型的守则问责机制不同。我们通过最近涉及联合王国邮局和荷兰Uber的法院案件的两个例子来说明这一点,并讨论一些实际考虑。