Unveiling the black box: a defendant-centric personal information rights framework for automated decision-making in Chinese criminal adjudication

Abstract

Algorithm-based automated decision-making (ADM) in criminal trials primarily serves as an evidentiary supplement and an analytical aid to the judicial process. While enhancing litigation efficiency and constraining arbitrary judgments, it introduces substantial risks of distorting substantive outcomes and eroding procedural legitimacy. Confronting this challenge, the article proposes institutionalizing personal information rights (PIRs) specifically tailored to function as a robust counterweight against ADM-induced risks in criminal adjudication. The theoretical scaffolding supporting this proposition rests upon five interlocking pillars of justification: the normative legitimacy of PIRs derives fundamentally from their capacity to redress asymmetric information power dynamics; the practical necessity emerges from their precise functional correspondence with risk mitigation imperatives; the doctrinal viability is substantiated through the normative interaction between the Personal Information Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China (PIPL) and the Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China (CPL); the structural isomorphism is demonstrated through their congruence with established criminal procedural rights; and the operational feasibility finds its foundation in the rigorous application of contextual integrity theory. In criminal adjudication, personal information rights operate as procedural rights of the defendant, articulated through three components: right to be informed, covering notification of ADM application and explanation of its logic, right to autonomous decision, encompassing prior refusal of personal data processing and post-decision rejection of fully automated outcomes, and right to judicial remedy, addressing failures in notification, explanation, or infringement of right to reject algorithmic outcomes. This article constructs a defendant-centric personal information rights framework to dismantle algorithmic “black box” and prevent potential “algorithmic domination”, thereby recentering human judgment in judicial decision-making and safeguarding procedural justice.