Deliberative Democracy vs Automated Ombudsmanship: the Ethical Limits of AI in Public Complaint Mediation

PDF
Published: Σεπ 20, 2026
Updated: 2026-09-20
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12681/dia.46976
Keywords:
Ombudsmen Artificial Intelligence Deliberative Democracy Good Governance Ethics Public conflicts
Kyriaki Papadopoulou
Ph.D. Candidate , Department of Business Administration, University of Western Macedonia, Greece
Stavros Kalogiannidis
Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Business Administration, University of Western Macedonia
Foteini Kagioglou
Ph.D. Lecturer, Department of Management Science and Technology, University of Western Macedonia
Abstract

This paper aims to examine the ethical dimensions of a potential incorporation of Artificial Intelligence into public complaint mediation through the institution of the ombudsman, whose existence is deeply rooted in deliberative democracy and whose operation is closely related to good governance ethics. The study investigates the conceivable practical implications of AI utilization in citizen complaint resolution by analysing converging and diverging elements between the two. Critical analysis is supported by the development of a theoretical framework that elaborates on the concepts of ombudsmanship and algorithmic automation. The study also discusses the special role ombudsmen are assigned when acting as promoters of public deliberation, which constitutes a challenge for AI simulation under pre-determined circumstances. The ethical issues that are recorded indicate the limits, powers and potentials of public conflict mediation in the presence of Artificial Intelligence to conclude whether these two can be compatible when resolving a dispute in public life.

Article Details
  • Section
  • Articles
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Abedi, F., Rajafibard, A., & Shojaei, D. (2025). Enhancing access to justice for land and property disputes through online dispute resolution and artificial intelligence. Computer Law & Security Review, 59, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2025.106194
Abraham, A. (2008). The ombudsman and the executive: The road to accountability. Parliamentary Affairs, 61(3), 535-544.
Afriansyah, F., & Nursalim, I. (2026). Responsible AI and Algorithmic Accountability in Public Administration: Governance Instruments, Oversight, and Democratic Legitimacy. Politics and Public Policy Journal, 1(1), 85-97.
Alessa, H. (2022). The role of Artificial Intelligence in Online Dispute Resolution: A brief and critical overview. Information & Communications Technology Law, 31(3), 319-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2022.2088060
Asimiadis, D., & Kagioglou, F. (2026). The Algorithmic Transformation of the Homo Economicus: Neoliberalism, Artificial Intelligence, and the End of Anthropocentrism. Dia-noesis: A Journal of Philosophy, 19(1), 15-35.
Bashir, B. (2012). Reconciling Historical Injustices: Deliberative Democracy and the Politics of Reconciliation. Res Publica, 18, 127-143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-011-9163-1
Betancourt, J. C., & Zlatanska, E. (2014). Online Dispute Resolution (ODR): What is it, and is it the Way Forward?. In ADR Arbitration and Mediation A Collection of Essays. Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.
Bibhu, N. K., & Gaur, S. (2026). Evaluating the Efficacy of Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Modern Legal Perspective. SB Knowledge Press.
Bissonette, S., Tyerman, J., & Chartrand, J. (2023). Mutuality in nurse-caregiver relationships in pediatric nursing: A concept analysis. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 70, 26-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2023.01.008
Bujupaj, D. (2024). The Significance of the Ombudsman in the Protection of the Citizen in Rule of Law. Knowledge - International Journal, 1, 197-202.
Chukwuokolo, J. C., & Nwankwo, V. O. J. N. A. (2024). A critical examination of communicative action in the political philosophy of Habermas. JASSD-Journal of African Studies and Sustainable Development, 7(2), 123-139.
De Leeuw, M. E. (2011). The European Ombudsman's Role as a Developer of Norms of Good Administration. European Public Law, 17(2), 349-368. https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2011024
Doğan, K. C. (2024). Ombudsmanance: A new concept in social sciences on ombudsman theory. Journal of Public Administration, Finance & Law, 1(31), 100-105. https://doi.org/10.47743/jopafl-2024-31-7
Febriani, R., Supartiningsih, S., & Tjahyadi, S. (2025). Jurgen Habermas's views on legal validity and discourse ethics: A literature review. Jurnal Civics: Media Kajian Kewarganegaraan, 22(1), 20-31. https://doi.org/10.21831/jc.v22i1.1289
Ferdman, A. (2025). AI, Deskilling, and the Prospects for Public Reason. Minds & Machines, 35(38), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-025-09737-w
Fischer, R., & Jarren, O. (2024). The platformization of the public sphere and its challenge to democracy. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 50(1), 200-215.
Fowler, C. (2025). Incorporating AI in mediation: Tips and tools for using AI in mediation. Nederlands-Vlaams Tijdschrift voor Mediation en Conflictmanagement, 29(2), 41-52. https://doi.org/10.5553/TMD/138638782025029002004
Garg, M. J. (2022). AI and Mediation: A Threat or Helpful Tool for Mediators-An Indian Perspective. Jus Corpus LJ, 3, 175.
Gill, C. (2011). Right first time: the role of ombudsmen in influencing administrative decision-making. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 33(2), 181-192. https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2011.617077
Goenaga, A. (2022). Who cares about the public sphere?. European Journal of Political Research, 61(1), 230-254. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12451
Green, T. B. (2026). Artificial Intelligence, Bureaucratic Dehumanization, and the Organizational Ombuds. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 43(4), 591-598. https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.70022
Groves, M., & Stuhmcke, A. (Eds.). (2022). The Ombudsman in the modern state. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. F. (2004). Why deliberative democracy?. Princeton University Press.
Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere (T. Burger Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1962)
Hill, L. B. (2015). The model ombudsman: Institutionalizing New Zealand's democratic experiment. Princeton University Press.
Holub, R. C. (2013). Jurgen Habermas: Critic in the public sphere. Routledge.
Kay, J., Kasirzadeh, A., & Mohamed, S. (2024). Epistemic Injustice in Generative AI. Proceedings of the AAAI ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 7(1), 684-697. https://doi.org/10.1609/aies.v7i1.31671
Katsh, E. E., Katsh, M. E., & Rifkin, J. (2001). Online dispute resolution: Resolving conflicts in cyberspace. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Kapoor, A., & Verma, V. (2024). Emotion AI: understanding emotions through artificial intelligence. International journal of engineering science & humanities, 1(1), 224-232.
Kumar, R., & Singh, B. D. (2024). The Rise of the Robo-Mediator: AI's Transformative Role in Alternative Dispute Resolution. White Black Legal, 3(1), 1-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5222318
Lutfi, R. (2026). Epistemic Compression and Symbolic Absence: Rethinking the Human and the Political. Dia-noesis: A Journal of Philosophy, 19(1), 203-236. https://doi.org/10.12681/dia.45799
Mousin, C. B. (2011). Ombuds in a Cloud of Exabytes - Understanding the Ombuds Digital Trail. Journal of the International Ombudsman Association, 4(2), 19-28.
Niemeyer, S., Veri, F., Dryzek, J. S., & Bächtiger, A. (2024). How Deliberation Happens: Enabling Deliberative Reason. American Political Science Review, 118(1), 345-362. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055423000023
O'Flynn, I., & Caluwaerts, D. (2018). Deliberation in Deeply Divided Societies. In The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, eds. Bächtiger, André, Dryzek, John S., Mansbridge, Jane and Warren, Mark E., 742-754. Oxford University Press.
Ottmann, G., & Silva Brito, I. (2026). Automated algorithms, epistemological shifts, and the erosion of fundamental legal and ethical principles in the social services. In AI and the disruption of welfare: Challenges for social work education and practice. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003673675-6
Peter, O. M. (2025). Artificial Intelligence And Reductionism In The Human Person: Philosophical And Ethical Considerations. Nnamdi Azikiwe Journal of Philosophy, 15(2), 87-99.
Peters, S. (2021). The evolution of alternative dispute resolution and online dispute resolution in the European Union. Revista CES Derecho, 12(1), 3-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.21615/cesder.12.1.1
Petrișor, M. F. (2025). The Evolution of the Ombudsman Institution: An Academic Perspective. Acta Universitatis Danubius. Juridica, 21(2), 37-44.
Quintão, H. C. M., de Oliveira Dias, M., da Mata, R. C., & da Silva Jr., D. S. (2026). Artificial Intelligence in Alternative Dispute Resolution: a Literature Review on Guidelines, Best Practices, and the Role of Engineering Experts in Complex Construction Contracts. Global Scientific Journals, 14(3), 821-830.
Remac, M. (2013). Standards of ombudsman assessment: A new normative concept?. Utrecht Law Review, 9(3), 62-78.
Rawls, J. (1997). The Idea of Public Reason Revisited. The University of Chicago Law Review, 64(3), 765-807. https://doi.org/10.2307/1600311
Rule, C. (2020). Online Dispute Resolution and the Future of Justice. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 16, 277-292. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101518-043049
Szabó, M. (2010). Disobedience and Criticism. The Ethos of Ombudsman's Institution and the "East-European Revolution of Human Rights". Journal für Rechtspolitik, 18, 12-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00730-010-0289-9
Sudhakar, M. A., & Shinghal, D. (2026). Harnessing AI Techniques for Optimized Data Retrieval in Big Data Analytics: Challenges, Solutions, and Future Prospects. Transformative Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal (TEMJ), 2(4), 224-231. https://doi.org/10.63665/temj.v02i04.252
Susen, S. (2023). A New Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere? With, against, and beyond Habermas. Soc, 60, 842-867. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-023-00908-y
Taranenko, F. (2024). Theoretical Principles and Origin of the Institute of Ombudsman as an Object of State Regulation. Bulletin of National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine, 2(21), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.52363/2414-5866-2024-2
Van Bouwel, J. (2009). The Problem With(out) Consensus: The Scientific Consensus, Deliberative Democracy and Agonistic Pluralism. In: Van Bouwel, J. (eds) The Social Sciences and Democracy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230246867_7
Wu, H., & Hu, Y. (2026). AI Subjectivity Without Embodiment: A Humean Critique and the Reconsideration of the Human and Political. Dia-noesis: A Journal of Philosophy, 19(1), 345-374. https://doi.org/10.12681/dia.45795
Zulkarnain, I. F., Abd Razak, S. S., Wan Mohamad Saferdin, W. F. H., & Firdaus, U. F. (2024). Ombudsman in Malaysia: An Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in promoting good governance principles. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 9(22), 265-271. https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v9iSI22.5871