Algorithmic Justice and Hostile Solidarity: An interdisciplinary examination of Parole Board decisions mediated by automated decision-making systems

算法正义和敌对团结：对英国自动决策系统调解的假释委员会决定的跨学科审查研究惩罚研究中的主导实证主义思维一贯忽视惩罚的排他性方面，忽视敌对情绪(如恐惧)在构建压制性刑事司法实践中所起的作用。过去几十年，英国的惩罚性言论和实践在很大程度上以明确的惩罚性言论为特征，这反过来又加强了更严格法律的颁布。这一点，再加上当前社会条件下普遍缺乏的社会团结感，在惩罚理论和实践中根深蒂固地形成了敌意情绪，培育了一种通过疏远而滋生“认同”的“敌意团结”--因为“守法公民”在对罪犯的敌意中变得团结一致。由于改过自新问题大多从属于报应主义，对使用数据来提高刑事司法效力的考虑导致越来越多地采用自动决策系统(ADM)来预测再犯罪风险。尽管与前瞻性评估惩罚的自由司法原则存在内在矛盾，而且有证据表明ADM可能不准确和有偏见，但英国刑事法院在假释程序中部署了一种名为罪犯评估系统(OASYS)的技术。然而，将OASYS部署合法化不仅可能(一)将其决定歪曲为“理性”(因此强化了对情绪的忽视与刑事司法的相关性)，而且(二)加剧了刑事司法决策者和犯罪者之间的隔阂(从而助长了该领域现有的其他感觉)。为了解决这些问题，这个项目将调查ADM在刑事诉讼程序中的部署(以及它所提倡的“客观性”的伪装)是否会加强英国社会中的“敌对团结”，并导致决策者在情感上疏远他们的决定的后果(从而混淆了他们的情感在量刑过程中所起的作用)。这样的调查是相关的，因为它可以弥合关于定罪和惩罚的情感方面的知识鸿沟，这是一个鲜有人探索的话题。此外，“算法治理”在刑事司法中仍然基本上没有得到解决，因此，鉴于这一领域的高风险，拟议的分析不仅是相关的，而且是紧迫的。在微观方面，该项目将允许重新评估决策者与OASYS之间的互动。在宏观背景下，它可以利用知识来反思和审查在全球刑事司法系统使用其他决策技术的广泛背景下的人类互动。“敌对团结”模式将作为一个框架，以了解围绕犯罪行为的当前条件的概念基础，因为它为理解英国刑事司法环境的复杂性提供了适当的理论背景。跨学科性将是追求惩罚、情感和刑事程序的犯罪学、心理学和社会学方面的理论接触的关键。此外，对依赖OASYS作出假释决定的法庭程序进行定性的社会法律评估，将有助于理解决策者遵循的情感理由。这种评估将有助于对部署OASYS是否(以及如何)加强了“敌对团结”的意识，并促使决策者在情感上疏远其决定的后果进行批判性评估。

Algorithmic Justice and Hostile Solidarity: An interdisciplinary examination of Parole Board decisions mediated by automated decision-making systems in the UKThe dominant positivist mindset in the study of punishment consistently disregards punishment's exclusionary aspect, neglecting the role played by hostile emotions (like fear) in constructing repressive criminal justice practices. Punitive discourse and practice in the last few decades in the UK have been largely characterised by explicitly retributive discourses that in turn reinforce the enactment of more strict laws. This combined with the lack of a prevalent sense of social solidarity in current social conditions has ingrained hostile emotions within punishment theory and practice, fostering a form of 'hostile solidarity' which feeds 'identification through estrangement' - as 'law abiding citizens' become solidary in their animosity towards offenders. With rehabilitation concerns mostly subordinated to retributivism, considerations about the use of data to enhance efficacy in criminal justice led to the increasing deployment of automated decision-making systems (ADM) to predict recidivism risks. Despite the inherent contradiction with liberal justice principles of prospectively assessing punishment and the evidence that ADM can be inaccurate and biased, UK criminal courts deploy a technology named Offender Assessment System (OASys) in parole proceedings. However, banalizing OASys deployment may not only (i) misrepresent its decisions as 'rational' (therefore reinforcing the neglect of emotions' relevance to criminal justice), but also (ii) strengthen estrangement between criminal justice decision-makers and offenders (thus contributing to the existing sense of othering in this field). To address such problems, this project will investigate whether ADM deployment in criminal procedure (and the pretence to 'objectivity' it promotes) may reinforce 'hostile solidarity' in the UK society and contribute to decision-makers' emotional alienation from the consequences of their decisions (therefore obfuscating the role their emotions play in the sentencing process). Such investigation is pertinent as it can bridge the knowledge gap over the emotional facet of criminalisation and punishment, a scarcely explored topic. Moreover, 'algorithmic governance' continues essentially unaddressed in criminal justice, hence the proposed analysis is not only relevant, but also urgent, given the high stakes in this area. In a micro context, this project will allow the reassessment of interactions decision-makers have with OASys. In a macro setting, it could contribute with knowledge to reflect over and review human interactions in a wide range of contexts where other decision-making technologies are used in criminal justice systems globally. The 'hostile solidarity' model will serve as a framework to understand the conceptual foundations of current conditions surrounding criminal practices, as it provides a suitable theoretical context to appreciate the complexity of the criminal justice environment in the UK. Interdisciplinarity will be key to pursue theoretical engagement with criminological, psychological, and sociological aspects of punishment, emotions, and criminal procedure. Moreover, a qualitative socio-legal assessment of court proceedings where OASys is relied upon for parole decisions will help understand the emotional rationale followed by decision-makers. Such assessment will enable the critical assessment of whether (and how) the deployment of OASys has reinforced the sense of 'hostile solidarity' and contributed to the emotional alienation of decision-makers from the consequences of their decisions.