CONSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF ALGORITHMIC GOVERNANCE: REGULATING AI-BASED PUBLIC DECISION-MAKING IN PAKISTAN’S LEGAL FRAMEWORK

Abstract

The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) in public administration has transformed traditional governance structures through the emergence of algorithmic governance, where automated systems increasingly support or replace human decision-making. While such systems enhance efficiency, consistency, and scalability in public service delivery, they simultaneously raise critical constitutional challenges related to due process, transparency, accountability, equality before law, and judicial review. In Pakistan, the constitutional framework guarantees fundamental rights under the 1973 Constitution; however, it does not explicitly regulate AI-based public decision-making systems, creating a significant governance and legal gap. This study examined the constitutional implications of algorithmic governance in Pakistan’s legal framework and evaluated the adequacy of existing constitutional and administrative safeguards in regulating AI-driven public decision-making. A qualitative doctrinal and comparative research design was employed, using constitutional analysis, judicial interpretation, and comparative regulatory frameworks, particularly from the European Union and OECD guidelines. The findings indicate that algorithmic governance poses substantial constitutional risks, including opacity in decision-making processes, algorithmic bias, weakened procedural fairness, and limited judicial review capacity. The study concludes that Pakistan requires a constitutionally aligned regulatory framework incorporating principles of transparency, explainability, human oversight, and algorithmic accountability to ensure that AI deployment in public administration remains consistent with fundamental rights and the rule of law.