Automated decisions and algorithmic risks: towards an interpretation of algorithmic discrimination in light of fundamental rights

Authors

  • Lucas Moreschi Paulo Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5020/2317-2150.2026.17037

Keywords:

automated decisions, algorithmic discrimination, fundamental rights, explainability, proportionality

Abstract

This article examines algorithmic discrimination as a constitutional-legal problem produced by the convergence of automated decisions, technical opacity and structural inequalities. It starts from the hypothesis that algorithmic discrimination should not be interpreted merely as a technical defect, statistical error or improper use of personal data, but as a contemporary form of fundamental-rights interference whenever automated systems classify, rank, recommend or exclude persons in sensitive domains of social life. The research adopts a logical-deductive method, with bibliographical review and normative analysis, articulating anti-discrimination law, data protection, proportionality and fundamental-rights theory. The argument incorporates an epistemic-proportional decision-making model developed in doctoral research, in which the intensity of interference, the abstract weight of colliding rights and the certainty of technical premises guide the A1-A3 scale of algorithmic risk. It argues that the adequate constitutional response must move beyond mere formal transparency towards a model of algorithmic justifiability, in which informational openness, explainability, auditability, meaningful human oversight and dynamic distribution of evidentiary burdens are calibrated according to risk and impact. It concludes that the greater the intensity of the interference and the lower the certainty of the technical premises, the stronger the duty of demonstration, correction and prevention imposed on controllers, developers, institutional users and the State.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Lucas Moreschi Paulo, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

PhD in Law from the University of Santa Cruz do Sul. Master of Laws (LL.M.) from the Foundation School of the Public Prosecution Service. Postdoctoral researcher in Law at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul. Attorney, professor, and researcher in legal theory, constitutional jurisdiction, fundamental rights, and artificial intelligence.

References

ALEXY, R. Teoria dos direitos fundamentais. Tradução de Virgílio Afonso da Silva. 2. ed. São Paulo: Malheiros, 2015.

BARAK, A. Proportionality: constitutional rights and their limitations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139035293 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139035293

BAROCAS, S.; SELBST, A. D. Big data's disparate impact. California Law Review, Berkeley, v. 104, n. 3, p. 671-732, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2477899 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2477899

BRASIL. [Constituição (1988)]. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil. Brasília, DF: Presidência da República, [2026a]. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/constituicao.htm. Acesso em: 21 jun. 2026.

BRASIL. Lei nº 13.709, de 14 de agosto de 2018. Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais (LGPD). Brasília, DF: Presidência da República, [2026b]. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2018/lei/l13709.htm. Acesso em: 21 jun. 2026.

BURRELL, J. How the machine ‘thinks’: understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data & Society, London, v. 3, n. 1, p. 1-12, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951715622512 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951715622512

MANTELERO, A. AI and Big Data: a blueprint for a human rights, social and ethical impact assessment. Computer Law & Security Review, Amsterdam, v. 34, n. 4, p. 754-772, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2018.05.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2018.05.017

PASQUALE, F. The black box society: the secret algorithms that control money and information. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674736061

PAULO, L. M. Discriminação algorítmica e proteção de grupos em situação de vulnerabilidade pela jurisdição constitucional: dever de proteção estatal à luz da lei material da ponderação. 2026. Tese (Doutorado em Direito) – Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito, Universidade de Santa Cruz do Sul, Santa Cruz do Sul, 2026. Disponível em: https://repositorio.unisc.br/jspui/handle/11624/4267. Acesso em: 21 jun. 2026.

SELBST, A. D.; BOYD, D.; FRIEDLER, S. A.; VENKATASUBRAMANIAN, S.; VERTESI, J. Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems. In: CONFERENCE ON FAIRNESS, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND TRANSPARENCY, 2019, Atlanta. Proceedings [...]. New York: ACM, 2019. p. 59-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287598 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287598

UNIÃO EUROPEIA. Regulamento (UE) 2016/679 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 27 de abril de 2016, relativo à proteção das pessoas singulares no que diz respeito ao tratamento de dados pessoais e à livre circulação desses dados e que revoga a Diretiva 95/46/CE (Regulamento Geral sobre a Proteção de Dados). Jornal Oficial da União Europeia, Bruxelas, série L, n. 119, p. 1-88, 4 maio 2016. Disponível em: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj. Acesso em: 21 jun. 2026.

UNIÃO EUROPEIA. Regulamento (UE) 2024/1689 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 13 de junho de 2024, que estabelece regras harmonizadas em matéria de inteligência artificial e que altera os Regulamentos (CE) n.o 300/2008, (UE) n.o 167/2013, (UE) n.o 168/2013, (UE) 2018/858, (UE) 2018/1139 e (UE) 2019/2144 e as Diretivas 2014/90/UE, (UE) 2016/797 e (UE) 2020/1828 (Regulamento da Inteligência Artificial). Jornal Oficial da União Europeia, Bruxelas, série L, p. 1-144, 12 jul. 2024. Disponível em: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj. Acesso em: 21 jun. 2026.

Published

2026-09-09

How to Cite

Paulo, L. M. (2026). Automated decisions and algorithmic risks: towards an interpretation of algorithmic discrimination in light of fundamental rights. Pensar - Journal of Legal Sciences, 31, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5020/2317-2150.2026.17037

Issue

Section

Thematic Axis 3 – Law, Technology, and a Transforming Society