Transparency, Governance and Regulation of Algorithmic Tools Deployed in the Criminal Justice System: a UK Case Study

Algorithmic tools are widely used in UK criminal justice but lack transparency: The paper finds that many tools deployed across data infrastructure, analysis, and risk prediction operate with insufficient public information about their purpose, function, and usage—making independent evaluation difficult.

Current governance mechanisms are inadequate: The authors identify a significant gap in oversight structures, calling for stronger governance to ensure tools are deployed transparently, safely, and ethically, with better documentation of intended goals and monitoring practices.

Stakeholder engagement is insufficient: The paper emphasizes that more meaningful engagement with affected communities and relevant stakeholders is needed when deploying algorithmic tools in criminal justice, where decisions directly impact people's lives and liberty.

Risk prediction tools require particular scrutiny: Among the three tool categories examined, risk prediction systems warrant special attention for evaluation of trustworthiness, suggesting these tools carry heightened concerns about bias, accuracy, and fairness in criminal justice contexts.

Concrete policy changes are necessary: The authors propose specific reforms including mandatory documentation of how tools compare to alternative approaches, clear accountability structures, and ongoing monitoring systems to track whether deployed tools actually achieve their stated objectives.