nam 22 uu 4500 10.17176/20220910-110333-0 DE-Verfassungsblog cr||||| 220910s2022||||xx#|||||o|||| ||| 0|eng|| 10.17176/20220910-110333-0 doi eng 342 23 Musco Eklund, Amanda Author aut (orcid)0000-0002-9704-520X Frontex and ‘Algorithmic Discretion’ (Part II) - Three Accountability Issues Musco Eklund, Amanda Verfassungsblog 2022-09-10 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Part I of this contribution explains how the regulatory design of the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) raises issues in relation to the rule of law principle of legality. Essentially, the ETIAS screening rules algorithm illustrates how automation can lead to what I suggest is a new form of arbitrariness. Part II reflects on how these legality issues affect other rule of law principles, including the principle of effective judicial protection. In turn, it raises three accountability issues and calls into question the assumption that the safeguard of manual processing in case of a ‘hit’ is a panacea for all rule of law challenges stemming from this semi-automated decision-making. CC BY-SA 4.0 accountability Algorithmic Decision-making border control ETIAS Rule of Law Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH Verfassungsblog 2366-7044 https://verfassungsblog.de/frontex-and-algorithmic-discretion-part-ii/ raw object