Social Welfare, Risk Profiling and Fundamental Rights: The Case of SyRI in the Netherlands external link

JIPITEC, vol. 12, num: 4, pp: 257-271, 2021

Abstract

This article discusses the use of automated decisioning-making (ADM) systems by public administrative bodies, particularly systems designed to combat social-welfare fraud, from a European fundamental rights law perspective. The article begins by outlining the emerging fundamental rights issues in relation to ADM systems used by public administrative bodies. Building upon this, the article critically analyses a recent landmark judgment from the Netherlands and uses this as a case study for discussion of the application of fundamental rights law to ADM systems by public authorities more generally. In the so-called SyRI judgment, the District Court of The Hague held that a controversial automated welfare-fraud detection system (SyRI), which allows the linking and analysing of data from an array of government agencies to generate fraud-risk reports on people, violated the right to private life, guaranteed under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Court held that SyRI was insufficiently transparent, and contained insufficient safeguards, to protect the right to privacy, in violation of Article 8 ECHR. This was one of the first times an ADM system being used by welfare authorities has been halted on the basis of Article 8 ECHR. The article critically analyses the SyRI judgment from a fundamental rights perspective, including by examining how the Court brought principles contained in the General Data Protection Regulation within the rubric of Article 8 ECHR as well as the importance the Court attaches to the principle of transparency under Article 8 ECHR. Finally, the article discusses how the Dutch government responded to the judgment. and discusses proposed new legislation, which is arguably more invasive, with the article concluding with some lessons that can be drawn for the broader policy and legal debate on ADM systems used by public authorities. implications.

automated decision making, frontpage, fundamentele rechten, Grondrechten, Mensenrechten, nederland, SyRI-wetgeving

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Social Welfare, Risk Profiling and Fundamental Rights: The Case of SyRI in the Netherlands}, author = {Appelman, N. and Fahy, R. and van Hoboken, J.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/jipitec_2021_4.pdf https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-12-4-2021/5407}, year = {1216}, date = {2021-12-16}, journal = {JIPITEC}, volume = {12}, number = {4}, pages = {257-271}, abstract = {This article discusses the use of automated decisioning-making (ADM) systems by public administrative bodies, particularly systems designed to combat social-welfare fraud, from a European fundamental rights law perspective. The article begins by outlining the emerging fundamental rights issues in relation to ADM systems used by public administrative bodies. Building upon this, the article critically analyses a recent landmark judgment from the Netherlands and uses this as a case study for discussion of the application of fundamental rights law to ADM systems by public authorities more generally. In the so-called SyRI judgment, the District Court of The Hague held that a controversial automated welfare-fraud detection system (SyRI), which allows the linking and analysing of data from an array of government agencies to generate fraud-risk reports on people, violated the right to private life, guaranteed under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Court held that SyRI was insufficiently transparent, and contained insufficient safeguards, to protect the right to privacy, in violation of Article 8 ECHR. This was one of the first times an ADM system being used by welfare authorities has been halted on the basis of Article 8 ECHR. The article critically analyses the SyRI judgment from a fundamental rights perspective, including by examining how the Court brought principles contained in the General Data Protection Regulation within the rubric of Article 8 ECHR as well as the importance the Court attaches to the principle of transparency under Article 8 ECHR. Finally, the article discusses how the Dutch government responded to the judgment. and discusses proposed new legislation, which is arguably more invasive, with the article concluding with some lessons that can be drawn for the broader policy and legal debate on ADM systems used by public authorities. implications.}, keywords = {automated decision making, frontpage, fundamentele rechten, Grondrechten, Mensenrechten, nederland, SyRI-wetgeving}, }

Annotatie bij Rb. Den Haag 5 februari 2020 (NJCM c.s. / Staat der Nederlanden – SyRI-wetgeving) external link

Nederlandse Jurisprudentie, num: 45, pp: 6792-6795, 2020

Abstract

De SyRI-wetgeving voldoet niet aan de in art. 8 lid 2 EVRM gestelde eis dat de inmenging in de uitoefening van het recht op respect voor het privéleven noodzakelijk is in een democratische samenleving, dat wil zeggen noodzakelijk, evenredig (proportioneel) en subsidiair in relatie tot het beoogde doel.

Annotaties, frontpage, Privacy, SyRI-wetgeving

Bibtex

Article{Dommering2020i, title = {Annotatie bij Rb. Den Haag 5 februari 2020 (NJCM c.s. / Staat der Nederlanden – SyRI-wetgeving)}, author = {Dommering, E.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2020_386.pdf}, year = {1110}, date = {2020-11-10}, journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie}, number = {45}, abstract = {De SyRI-wetgeving voldoet niet aan de in art. 8 lid 2 EVRM gestelde eis dat de inmenging in de uitoefening van het recht op respect voor het privĂ©leven noodzakelijk is in een democratische samenleving, dat wil zeggen noodzakelijk, evenredig (proportioneel) en subsidiair in relatie tot het beoogde doel.}, keywords = {Annotaties, frontpage, Privacy, SyRI-wetgeving}, }