<![CDATA[Background: The digitalization of government procurement through Indonesia’s E-Catalog system has shifted certain functions traditionally performed by human bureaucrats to algorithmic systems that exercise what may be termed “algorithmic discretion” in product ranking and recommendation. Legal challenges arise because Indonesia’s administrative law framework, particularly Law No. 30 of 2014 on Government Administration, remains largely anthropocentric and inadequately addresses algorithmic systems acting as “invisible bureaucrats.” This creates an accountability gap when algorithmic decisions produce hidden biases that adversely affect providers’ rights. Objective: This research aims to harmonize the right-to-explanation principle under the EU AI Act and Canada’s Algorithmic Impact Assessment (AIA) framework with Indonesia’s General Principles of Good Governance (Asas-Asas Umum Pemerintahan yang Baik, AUPB) to formulate a doctrine of “Administrative Due Process for Algorithms.” Methods: This research employs comparative legal analysis to examine the Canadian AIA framework and the EU AI Act in relation to Indonesia’s administrative law framework. Results: The findings indicate that the AUPB principles of diligence (kecermatan) and openness (keterbukaan) can be operationalized as obligations to audit black-box algorithms, giving rise to a new theoretical construct termed “Algorithmic Administrative Law.” This approach shifts the focus of administrative oversight from the examination of physical documents to the auditing of algorithmic logic. Conclusion: This research recommends amending Law No. 30 of 2014 on Government Administration to explicitly address decisions made through automated decision-making systems, as well as adopting an AIA protocol through Indonesia’s National Public Procurement Agency (Lembaga Kebijakan Pengadaan Barang/Jasa Pemerintah, LKPP) as a mandatory audit mechanism before algorithmic ranking systems are deployed for public use.]]>
