Over the last two decades, Constitutional Courts from different countries have produced relevant decisions on the scope of fundamental rights protection in the digital public sphere. In the US debate on freedom of speech, the Supreme Court has updated standards for its exercise in the digital environment. In the European context, different Constitutional Courts have widely contributed to the debate on data protection regulation and informational self-determination. Seeking to contribute to this agenda of digital constitutionalism, the present paper shares findings of empirical qualitative research in development on the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court rulings addressing fundamental rights and the Internet, mapping the Court’s role to the regulation of the digital context, and critically analyzing the judicial behavior. We expect to contribute to advancing the digital debate in Public Law through a global south perspective.
Given that the Brazilian Public Administration has incorporated artificial intelligence into different decision-making processes and for the assistance of decisions and public policies, there is a need to change the logic of organizations to move from a “digital bureaucracy” to a “bureaucracy intelligent”, which uses AI to facilitate, simplify and speed up interactions, tasks, document generation, etc., based on the ground in automation, as well as predictive activity. It is not just about adapting the government and the Public Administration to digitalization, the Internet or social networks. Here, a relevant problem arises, concerning the use of AI techniques in public elections. The question lies in the fact that there are elements that permeate this public election (values, ethical commitments, weighting, renunciation in favor of future generations, etc.) that seem insusceptible to algorithmic translation.
The British Columbia (BC) Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) is the first online tribunal in Canada. It promises to “bring the justice system to the public” in an era where access to justice (A2J) is a major challenge. Its beginnings were humble: from 2016-2019, the CRT decided condo, non-profit and small claims disputes <$5,000.
At the same time, something else was in motion. In 2019, after reports that BC’s public motor vehicle insurance corporation was in financial crisis, sweeping changing were announced, including expansion of CRT jurisdiction over MVA claims. Opposition included a constitutional challenge that argued the changes “limits [A2J]..by creating undue hardship for claimants.”
What are the implications of swift expansion and political embattlement for the legitimacy of the CRT, a young institution designed to increase A2J for straightforward claims? Is “mission creep” an inevitable aspect of modern institutions and do the changes undermine the CRT’s broader A2J promises?
In the post pandemic digitalized society, the concept of digital universes (known under the generical Metaverse notion) is generating new socio-economic relations. These relations have economic meaning and could imply significance under tax legislation. We can identify here two major fields of work: taxing the administrator of the Metaverse and taxing the within operating persons. The relevance of these economic flows under tax law is still uncharted as are the mechanisms of identifying the taxable basis and determining taxing competence. The study aims at mapping these transactions as to their relevance to taxation and proposing ways of establishing the tax claims.