Digital Discretion and AI-Based Automated Decisions in Indonesian Administrative Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56347/jle.v5i2.416Keywords:
Digital Discretion, Administrative Law, Ai-Based Public ServicesAbstract
The digital transformation of government has led to the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) to support public services, including complaint chatbots, automated social assistance eligibility assessment systems, and algorithm-based licensing. However, under administrative law, public decisions must be issued by authorized officials in accordance with the principles of legality and accountability. When part of the decision-making process is conducted through an automated system, important legal questions arise: Can automated decisions be categorized as a form of administrative discretion, and who bears legal responsibility when such decisions harm citizens? This study aims to analyze the legal status of AI-based automated decisions in relation to the concept of administrative discretion and to formulate a legal framework that ensures accountability, transparency, and the protection of citizens’ rights. This research employs a normative juridical method using statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. The analysis focuses on Articles 22–23 of Law No. 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration, relevant regulations on electronic-based government systems, and practices of digital public services. The findings show that automated decisions cannot be regarded as administrative discretion without a clear legal basis authorizing their use, while legal responsibility remains with the authorized officials or public institutions operating the system. The novelty of this study lies in its conceptualization of “digital discretion” within Indonesian administrative law and its proposal of a risk-based supervision model incorporating a human-in-the-loop mechanism to ensure that the use of AI in public administration remains subject to the rule of law.
References
Alon-Barkat, S., & Busuioc, M. (2023). Human–AI interactions in public sector decision making: “Automation bias” and “selective adherence” to algorithmic advice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 33(1), 153–169. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac007
Asshiddiqie, J. (2019). Hukum administrasi pemerintahan. RajaGrafindo Persada.
Asshiddiqie, J. (2021). Negara hukum, konstitusi, dan demokrasi digital. Constitution Press.
Bignami, F. (2022). Artificial intelligence accountability of public administration. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 70(Supplement_1), i312–i346. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avac012
Covilla, J. C. (2024). Artificial intelligence and administrative discretion: Exploring adaptations and boundaries. European Journal of Risk Regulation. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2024.76
Enarsson, T., Enqvist, L., & Naarttijärvi, M. (2022). Approaching the human in the loop: Legal perspectives on hybrid human/algorithmic decision-making in three contexts. Information & Communications Technology Law, 31(1), 123–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2021.1958860
Erison, Y. (2024). Transforming public services with artificial intelligence (AI): Latest theory and concept innovation for the future. Unisda Press.
Hildebrandt, M. (2018). Algorithmic regulation and the rule of law. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 376(2128), Article 20170355. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2017.0355
Ministry of Investment/BKPM. (2022). OSS-RBA implementation evaluation report.
Ministry of Communication and Informatics of the Republic of Indonesia. (2020). National strategy for Indonesian artificial intelligence 2020–2045.
OECD. (2019a). The path to becoming a data-driven public sector. OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2019b). Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence. OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2023). Advancing accountability in AI: Governing and managing risks throughout the lifecycle for trustworthy AI (OECD Digital Economy Papers No. 349). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/2448f04b-en
Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia. (2021a). Report on the results of the maladministrative examination of the distribution of COVID-19 social assistance.
Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia. (2021b). Results of maladministration checks in public services based on digital systems.
Plantinga, P. (2024). Digital discretion and public administration in Africa: Implications for the use of artificial intelligence. Information Development, 40(2), 332–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669221117526
President of the Republic of Indonesia. (2018). Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 95 of 2018 concerning Electronic-Based Government Systems (SPBE).
Prasetyo, T., & Hudaya, A. A. (2014). Filsafat hukum: Perspektif teori, praktik, dan reformasi hukum Indonesia. RajaGrafindo Persada.
Ridwan, H. R. (2020). Hukum administrasi negara. RajaGrafindo Persada.
Santoso, A. P. A. (2025). Hukum administrasi negara. Pustaka Baru Press.
Sudan, Ministry of Communications. (2022). Digital transformation strategy 2025.
Syahuri, T. (2022). Hukum pemerintahan elektronik (e-government law). Prenadamedia Group.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Lely Mahartina Khoiru Ummah, Muhammad Wildan Sofi (Author); Abdalmonem Muhammad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles in this journal are published under the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC-BY 4.0). This means that users may share and adapt the articles published on this website in a reasonable manner, but they must give appropriate credit to the creator and indicate the changes they have made. Users must not apply additional restrictions, but must publish the work under the same license (CC-BY 4.0).
