Plea for the introduction of a 'monitorial power'

The essay collection includes a contribution from prof. Albert Meijer: A plea for the introduction of a 'monitorial power', which is summarised below.

Summary

The essay argues for the establishment of a "monitoring power" to enhance the existing checks and balances in government, especially in light of technological advancements that increasingly rely on digital systems for policy execution. These systems, while often efficient, have raised concerns regarding biases and discrimination, evident in high-profile cases like the child benefits scandal in the Netherlands.

In section 1, the Technological Transformation of Government, Meijer argues that the modern state relies heavily on automated systems for various administrative processes, including subsidies and law enforcement. Many of these functions operate with minimal human oversight, which can lead to problematic outcomes. Research highlights the need to scrutinize these technologies to understand their long-term implications.

Section 2, Power Imbalance and Unintended Patterns stresses that the shift towards digital governance introduces the risk of “unseen” biases. For instance, algorithms intended to detect fraud can inadvertently target specific demographics disproportionately, without clear accountability. Historical cases illustrate how biases can become systemic and go unnoticed within individual decision-making frameworks.

Section 3 points at the Inadequate Current Checks and Balances. The existing framework of checks and balances is ill-equipped to handle the complexities introduced by digital governance. While legislative bodies set broad policies and judicial authorities oversee specific cases, there is no formal mechanism for systemic oversight of large-scale administrative practices. This gap allows for unexamined biases to perpetuate, as oversight tends to focus on individual decisions rather than overarching patterns.

In section 4, Meijer presents a Proposal for a Monitoring Power. To restore balance, the text proposes a dedicated institution for systematic oversight, termed the "monitoring power." This entity would be responsible for evaluating the large-scale application of laws and digital technologies, ensuring they do not foster discrimination or biases. Current institutions, such as the National Ombudsman and the Court of Audit, could evolve into this role, but would need enhanced authority and independence.

Section 5 presents the Implementation Steps: Establishing a monitoring power would require gradual reforms, building on existing institutions while empowering them with formal mandates to oversee both legislative and executive functions. This would help ensure that digital systems used in policy execution and judicial decision-making are continuously assessed for fairness and transparency.

The concluding section, focuses on the Importance for Democratic Legitimacy. Ultimately, the creation of a monitoring power is essential for maintaining public trust in democratic institutions. The increasing reliance on digital systems calls for an adaptive governance model that prioritizes accountability and the prevention of discriminatory practices. By strengthening checks and balances with a dedicated monitoring authority, the legitimacy of the democratic rule of law can be preserved in the digital age.

In conclusion, the text advocates for a proactive approach to governance in the face of technological changes, emphasizing the necessity of a monitoring body to safeguard democratic values and ensure equitable treatment within automated systems.

This is a summary. The full essay is part of the collection 'De Grondwet en nieuwe technologie: klaar voor de toekomst?' and was first published on Rijksoverheid on September 30, 2024.