Algorithms in the mechanism of implementation of constitutional rights and freedoms: challenges in the digital age

Available in Russian

Price 100 Rub.

Authors: Igor Pibaev, Snezhana Simonova

DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2020-6-31-50

Keywords: algorithms; artificial intelligence; data; digital technologies; ethical principles; human rights


The development and wide dissemination of new technological solutions lead to mainstreaming of algorithmic decision-making processes. Digital technologies become highly-demanded in state activity as well as social life and this gives the springboard for scientific discussion about the shift in the scope of constitutional rights and freedoms connected with extending and new limitation. Private data processing, content management, unfettered control over information and search results provide IT companies with huge powers concerning fundamental human rights. The article deals with some legal and ethic issues relating to the algorithms and artificial intelligence systems impact on the enforcement and the defense of constitutional rights. Taking into account the algorithmic nature and legal aspects as well as foreign practices the authors note the risks for civil, political and socio-economic rights. Special attention is given to the conceptualization of the ways the algorithms influence on legal status and human rights, justification of the suitable ways of reducing the risks connected with total algorithmization. The paper contains the study of the significance and extensive prospects of the ensuring the right to explanation in the context of the sense and reasons of automated decisions in order to enhance their transparency and accountability. The authors note that in spite of the lack of legal rules regulating algorithmic communication some state make their own steps on the way toward harmonization of algorithms with human rights and legal procedures. It is emphasized that state rejection in human translation of algorithmic processes may lead to further privatization of public powers in human rights protection. At the end of the paper the possible solutions of the discussed problems are suggested through the lens of ethic principles worked out in partnership with religious clerics. The mutual ethic declaration was signed by IBM, Microsoft and Roman Catholic Church and this fact strengthens confidence in the future of artificial intelligence as an instrument not only for narrow groups but for all of mankind.

About the authors:Igor Pibaev – Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, Associate Professor of the Department of State Legal Disciplines at Volga-Vyatka Institute (branch) of the Moscow State University of Law named after O.E.Kutafin (MSAL), Kirov, Russia; Snezhana Simonova – Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, Senior Lecturer of the Department of Social and Family Law at P.G.Demidov Yaroslavl State University, Expert of the Central Office of Human Rights Ombudsman in Yaroslavl Region, Yaroslavl, Russia.

Citation: Pibaev I., Simonova S. (2020) Algoritmy v mekhanizme realizatsii konstitutsionnykh prav i svobod: vyzovy tsifrovoy epokhi [Algorithms in the mechanism of implementation of constitutional rights and freedoms: challenges in the digital age]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.29, no.6, pp.31–50. (In Russian).


Antinuchchi M. (2020) Eticheskaya khartiya ES po ispol'zovaniyu tekhnologiy iskusstvennogo intellekta v sudebnoy sisteme i zakonodatel'stvo, reguliruyushchee blokcheyn, kak “troyanskiy kon'” bor'by s kontrafaktsiey v global'noy perspektive [EU Ethical Charter on the use of artificial intelligence in judicial systems with a part of the law being established on blockchain as a Trojan horse anti-counterfeiting in a global perspective]. Vestnik Universiteta imeni O.E.Kutafina, vol.66, no.2, pp.36–42. (In Russian).

Barlow J.P. (1996) A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace. Electronic Frontier Foundation, 8 February. Available at: (accessed: 22.11.2020).

Birnhack M.D., Elkin N. (2008) The Invisible Handshake: The Reemergence of the State in the Digital Environment. Tel Aviv University Law Faculty Papers, no.54. Available at: (accessed: 22.11.2020).

Bondar' N.S. (2019) Informatsionno-tsifrovoe prostranstvo v konstitutsionnom izmerenii: iz praktiki Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Information and digital space in the constitutional dimension: from the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no.11, pp.25–42. (In Russian).

Chandler S. (2020) China Uses Android Malware to Spy on Ethnic Minorities Worldwide, New Research Says. Forbes, 6 July. Available at: (accessed: 22.11.2020).

Chandler S. (2020) Vatican AI Ethics Pledge Will Struggle to Be More than PR Exercise. Forbes, 4 March. Available at: (accessed: 22.11.2020).

Eliot L. (2020) Pope Francis Offers “Rome Call for AI Ethics” to Step-up AI Wokefulness, Which Is a Wake-up Call for AI Self-Driving Cars too. Forbes, 10 March. Available at: (accessed: 22.11.2020).

Fitsilis F. (2019) Imposing Regulation on Advanced Algorithms, Berlin; Cham; New York: Springer.

Gregorio G. (2019) From Constitutional Freedoms to the Power of the Platforms: Protecting Fundamental Rights Online in the Algorithmic Society. European Journal of Legal Science, vol.11, no.2, pp.65–103.

Heilweil R. (2020) The Pope’s Plan to Fight Back against Evil AI. Recode, 28 February. Available at: (accessed: 22.11.2020).

Johnson D.R., Post D. (1996) Law and Borders – The Rise of Law in Cyberspace. First Monday, vol.1, no.1. Available at: (accessed: 22.11.2020).

Karlson H. (2020) The Vatican and AI: Rome Calls for AI Ethics. Patheos, 6 March. Available at: (accessed: 22.11.2020).

Krouford K. (ed.) (2018) Izbrannye resheniya Federal'nogo Konstitutsionnogo Suda Germanii [Selected decisions of the Federal Сonstitutional Court of Germany], Moscow: Infotropik Media. (In Russian).

Lessig L. (2006) Code Version 2.0, New York: Basic Books.

Macaulay T. (2020) Vatican’s AI Ethics Plan Lacks the Legal Restrictions It Needs to Be Effective. The Next Web, 2 March. Available at: (accessed: 22.11.2020).

Maslovskaya T.S. (2019) Tsifrovaya sreda i konstitutsionnoe pravo: grani vzaimodeystviya [Digital environment and constitutional law: facets of interaction]. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo, no.9, pp.18–22. (In Russian).

Mir J.B., Bassini M. (2016) Freedom of Expression in the Internet: Main Trends of the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights. In: Pollicino O., Romeo G. (eds.) The Internet and Constitutional Law. The Protection of Fundamental Rights and Constitutional Adjudication in Europe, London; New York: Routledge, pp.71–93.

Nevinskiy V.V. (2019) “Tsifrovye prava” cheloveka: sushchnost', sistema, znachenie [“Digital rights” of a person: essence, system, meaning]. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo, no.10, pp.26–32. (In Russian).

Pilipenko A.N. (2019) Frantsiya: k tsifrovoy demokratii [France: to digital democracy]. Pravo. Znurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, no.4, pp.185–207. (In Russian).

Sinyugin V.Yu. (2014) Administrativno-pravovoy status sub'ektov, osushchestvlyayushchikh pub­lichno znachimye funktsii [Administrative-law status of subjects effectuating publicly significant functions]. Administrativnoe pravo i protsess, no.11, pp.25–28. (In Russian).

Yu R., Spina Ali G. (2019) What's Inside the Black Box? AI Challenges for Lawyers and Researchers. Legal Information Management, vol.19, no.1, pp.2–13.

Završnik A. (2020) Criminal Justice, Artificial Intelligence Systems, and Human Rights. ERA Forum, vol.20, no.5, pp.567–583.

Zor'kin V.D. (2018) Pravo v tsifrovom mire [Law in the digital world]. Rossiyskaya gazeta, 29 May. (In Russian).

Zor'kin V.D. (2020) Pravo budushchego v epokhu tsifr. Individual'naya svoboda ili sil'noe gosudarstvo? [The law of the future in the era of numbers. Individual freedom or a strong state]. Rossiy­skaya gazeta, 15 April. (In Russian).