Judicial review of algorithmic administrative systems legality evidence and remedies in the smart city state

Smart city programs are increasingly used by governments to manage public services through digital and automated systems, and this development is closely linked with questions of administrative power, fairness, and accountability. Existing public law doctrines in common law systems were shaped for human decision-making and have not been fully adapted to administrative action carried out through algorithmic systems, which creates a clear gap in current legal thinking. The research is motivated by the growing use of algorithmic systems as effective decision-makers in areas such as utilities, mobility, welfare, and digital identity, especially in contexts marked by limited state capacity and prolonged emergency conditions. The study aims to examine how judicial review should respond to algorithmic administrative systems so that legality, fairness, and accountability remain protected while legitimate administrative goals are still met. Methodologically, the article adopts a doctrinal and normative legal research design based on structured analysis of public law doctrine, relevant judicial and administrative materials, and governance instruments on automated decision-making. The focus is on developing a doctrinal framework that treats algorithmic systems as legally reviewable decision infrastructures rather than neutral technical tools. The study highlights the importance of reviewing not only final automated outcomes but also earlier design choices, including data use, system objectives, and oversight mechanisms. The research is important because it offers courts and lawmakers clearer legal tools to assess algorithmic administration, with particular attention to settings where oversight is weak and emergency powers risk becoming normalized, increasing the danger of opacity, discrimination, and unchecked security repurposing.