From Kafka’s Courts to AI Tribunals: Bureaucratic Alienation and the Future of Justice

The Trial furnishes a diagnostic lens—opacity (epistemic), arbitrariness (normative), alienation (experiential)—for assessing AI-mediated governance in law and administration. Using literary hermeneutics, critical legal theory, and normative jurisprudence, the article maps this grid onto three emblematic systems—COMPAS (US), Chinook (Canada), and China’s social credit—showing how “black-box” procedures displace judgment, entrench structural bias, and erode due process. It evaluates partial remedies in the EU AI Act, GDPR, and UNESCO’s AI Ethics Recommendation, and specifies safeguards centered on transparency, contestability, accountability, and dignity (TCAD). The article concludes by flagging risks from large language models—fabricated citations, provenance-free drafting, and bias propagation—and by outlining TCAD-aligned controls to preserve agency and legal recognition in the age of algorithmic justice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Law Culture and the Humanities
Published
2025-11-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/17438721251393506
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

From Kafka’s Courts to AI Tribunals: Bureaucratic Alienation and the Future of Justice

Zakaria Garno, Nixon Doudoute
Law Culture and the Humanities
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

From Kafka’s Courts to AI Tribunals: Bureaucratic Alienation and the Future of Justice

Zakaria Garno, Nixon Doudoute
article en

Abstract

The Trial furnishes a diagnostic lens—opacity (epistemic), arbitrariness (normative), alienation (experiential)—for assessing AI-mediated governance in law and administration. Using literary hermeneutics, critical legal theory, and normative jurisprudence, the article maps this grid onto three emblematic systems—COMPAS (US), Chinook (Canada), and China’s social credit—showing how “black-box” procedures displace judgment, entrench structural bias, and erode due process. It evaluates partial remedies in the EU AI Act, GDPR, and UNESCO’s AI Ethics Recommendation, and specifies safeguards centered on transparency, contestability, accountability, and dignity (TCAD). The article concludes by flagging risks from large language models—fabricated citations, provenance-free drafting, and bias propagation—and by outlining TCAD-aligned controls to preserve agency and legal recognition in the age of algorithmic justice.

Law Culture and the Humanities
Euro-Mediterranean University of Fes (MA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

From Kafka’s Courts to AI Tribunals: Bureaucratic Alienation and the Future of Justice — Zakaria Garno, Nixon Doudoute · Law Culture and the Humanities (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS