E-Government upside down
Kann man als Bürger durch eGovernment die Welt verändern? Joshua Browder hat es vorgemacht, indem er einen Chatbot programmiert hat, der Bürgern dabei hilft, sich gegen rechtswidrige Bescheide für Falschparker zu wehren. Nach einer kurzen automatisierten Konversation erstellte der Chatbot ein Schreiben für seinen Gesprächspartner. Der Erfolg war groß: nach eigenen Angaben wurden in 160 000 Fällen Bescheide zurückgenommen oder aufgehoben. Das bedeutet eine Ersparnis von Bußgeldern in Höhe von 4 Millionen US Dollar. Anschließend wurden die Funktionen erweitert, der Chatbot hilft jetzt auch Bürgern, die gerade obdachlos geworden sind. Was können wir daraus für die Zukunft der elektronischen Verwaltung lernen? Diese Prozesse müssen nicht immer von oben angestoßen werden. Ferner kann eGovernment sich auch positiv für Rechtsschutzmöglichkeiten der Bürger auswirken. So führt Digitalisierung nicht zu weniger sondern zu mehr Menschlichkeit und Rechtsstaatlichkeit. Das könnte eine Versprechung wahrmachen, die der globale Konstitutionalismus mit dem Internet verbindet, nämlich dass das Internet den Bürger dem Staat näher bringt.
Imagine that you were almost twenty years old and you wanted to change the world by helping people who are somehow barred from enforcing their rights, what would you do? The Londoner Joshua Browder answered this question by programming the chatbot DoNotPay, which is claimed to be „The World’s First Robo Lawyer„.
Doing good with a bot
It is a chatbot (programme allowing for natural language conversations) that can be approached by people with specific problems like homelessness or unjustified parking tickets and helps them to file a letter to the competent authorities. The idea was sparked when Browder received 30 unjustified parking tickets at the age of 18. He wondered how he could help people who wanted to take action against a parking ticket. He then successfully programmed a chatbot which asked people simple questions in order to obtain the knowledge necessary for making their case. After an automated conversation, the bot advises people on the right course of action and potentially even returns a letter that they can use to send to their local authorities. In order to understand the administrative process and the relevant criteria, Browder filed several freedom of information requests. Browder programmed two versions for London and New York, which became a huge success: The Tech Insider says that 3,000 people used the service, 250,000 parking tickets were appealed, with 160,000 successful appeals, saving the appellants a combined US$ 4 million.The young coder extended this idea to compensation in cases of late trains or late flights. Yet, he was also frequently contacted by users asking him for help with other problems. This is when he discovered the problem of evictions and ensuing homelessness. Collaborating with lawyers and several non-profit organisations, he went on to extend his chatbot to cover this topic as well. This new area revealed limitations of such automation projects: while there was an enforceable right to housing in the UK, the situation in the US varied from one city to another. Shelly Nortz from the advocacy group Coalition of the Homeless told the Washington Post about the problems of automation: „Automation can be helpful, but it can also be incredibly flawed. A lot of our clients don’t fit into cookie-cutter situations and I’m afraid of vulnerabilities that could rise from a bot handling applications and other legal issues.“
Take away for eGovernment
This story certainly challenges some general assumptions concerning eGovernment. First, eGovernment is not a one-track development: inventions and ideas can also come from other actors and especially from civil society. As in other fields, innovation is often sparked by collaboration and there are several attempts to institutionalise such collaboration. Take for example the innovation lab of the World Food Programme, bringing together different actors from international organisations, the private sector as well as civil society. In the case ofDoNotPay, Browder collaborates with different local councils and other administrative entities. For his latest project, helping refugees who speak only their native tongue, Browder managed to get access to the super computer Watson.Another lesson from this story can be framed as automation paradox. This describes the insight that automation and digitisation can lead to more instead of less humanity and an example of how the internet can narrow the gap between individual and state. In the case of a Robo Lawyer, this fact is achieved by making certain legal services available for free. This most probably helped people to invoke their rights in situations in which they would have otherwise omitted any action. In other cases, digitisation replaces the work of civil servants and, thereby, frees up some time resources. As a consequence of automation, civil servants might have more time to focus on atypical or difficult cases. Again, the example of DoNotPay is telling, as Browder was always open to comments and input from people in need and has continued to develop new features for them.The chatbot is also a good example of how a rule of law culture can be implemented. When we think about the evolution of the rule of law, we often think about landmark cases taking judicial and administrative review to another level. Yet, the rule of law can also be concerned when there is a widespread under-enforcement of rights just because individuals do not have enough resources. There are different reasons barring people from enforcing their rights before a court. Digitisation can allay some of the difficulties, if it is implemented the right way.As this example shows, eGovernment is not necessarily a disruptive game changer that can help to improve government services, the development can happen evolutively. The initiative does not necessarily come from the administration. Automation can help to further the rule of law culture and to make the administration more humane. Not exactly what you would expect from digitisation of government, is it? But then, you do not expect a twenty year old to succeed in changing the world…
This article was first published on policyreview.info
- Browder. DoNotPay: get free legal help in under 30 seconds. Retrieved from http://www.donotpay.co.uk
- Browder, J. (2016). DoNotPay Housing Secret Video: youtube.com. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRwn-rPxvpA
- Jowell, J. (2015). The Rule of Law and its Underlying Values. In J. L. Jowell, D. Oliver, & C. O’Cinneide (Eds.), The changing constitution (8th ed., pp. 10–34). Oxford: Oxford University
- Press.Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 446-454.
- McGoogan, C. (2016, June 29). 19-year-old’s ‚robot lawyer‘ overturns 160,000 parking tickets. The Telegraph. Retrieved fromhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/06/29/19-year-olds-robot-lawy…
- Mendelsohn, T. (2016, August 16). Chatbot lawyer that overturned 170,000 parking tickets now helps fight homelessness. arsTechnica UK. Retrieved from http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/08/donotpay-chatbot-lawyer-hom…
- Muoio, D. (2016). A 19-year-old created a free robot lawyer that has beaten 160,000 parking tickets. Retrieved fromhttp://www.techinsider.io/joshua-browder-bot-overturns-160000-parking-ti…
- Pernice, I. (2015). Global Constitutionalism and The Internet. Taking People Seriously. In R. Hofmann (Ed.), The Pasts and Futures of Law beyond the State. Frankfurt a.M.: Campus.
- Triola, C. (2016). Chatbot offers free legal aid to the homeless. Retrieved from http://mashable.com/2016/08/10/robot-lawyer-bot/#HwUidxLLygq7
- Turner, K. (2016, August 9). This robot lawyer helps the newly evicted file for housing aid. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2016/08/09/legal-robo…
Foto: flickr.de CC BY 2.0
Dieser Beitrag spiegelt die Meinung des Autors und weder notwendigerweise noch ausschließlich die Meinung des Institutes wider. Für mehr Informationen zu den Inhalten dieser Beiträge und den assoziierten Forschungsprojekten kontaktieren Sie bitte firstname.lastname@example.org