The Perfect Balance: Algorithmic Efficiency vs. Procedural Guarantees in Peruvian Public Procurement

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18800/iusetveritas.202502.013

Keywords:

Artificial Intelligence, Public Procurement, Efficiency, Digital Government, Due Process, Traceability, Administrative Law, Peru

Abstract

This article analyzes the benefits and challenges involved in implementing artificial intelligence (AI) in Peruvian public procurement, highlighting both its potential to enhance efficiency, traceability, and transparency, as well as the risks that arise in the absence of an adequate legal and technical framework. It examines the tension between algorithmic efficiency and procedural safeguards, particularly due process, administrative reasoning, and the right of defense. Based on a normative, functional, and comparative analysis with references to experiences in Estonia, France, Singapore, Portugal, and Ukrainethis study identifies valuable lessons for the Peruvian context. Finally, it proposes a hybrid model of automation that reconciles technological innovation with legal safeguards, ensuring that AI strengthens the rule of law rather than undermines it.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

  • Rodrigo Andrés Freitas Cabanillas, Universidad Científica del Sur (Lima, Perú)

    Abogado por la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú (Lima, Perú). Máster en Dirección en Gestión de Proyectos por la Universidad Rey Juan Carlos. Profesor del curso de MARC’S en la Universidad Científica del Sur. Egresado de la Maestría en Derecho Administrativo Económico por la Universidad del Pacífico.
    Correo electrónico: rfreitas@cientifica.edu.pe.

  • Pedro Eduardo Santillán Crosby, Universidad Científica del Sur (Lima, Perú)

    Abogado por la Universidad Científica del Sur (Lima, Perú).
    Correo electrónico: pedroeduardosantillancrosby3@gmail.com.

Published

2025-12-19

How to Cite

The Perfect Balance: Algorithmic Efficiency vs. Procedural Guarantees in Peruvian Public Procurement. (2025). IUS ET VERITAS, 71, 222-246. https://doi.org/10.18800/iusetveritas.202502.013