Problem & Vision

The Problem: Unchecked Discretion

In many public systems – from permits and licences to policing and welfare – frontline officials wield broad discretionary powers. This discretion is often justified as necessary flexibility, but it undermines fairness and the rule of law. When outcomes depend on a particular officer’s mood or bias, citizens cannot rely on equal treatment. Corruption thrives when rules are applied arbitrarily. A regional survey of South Asian countries found that 62 % of Indians who had contact with the police paid bribes, while 61 % paid bribes to obtain registry and permit services and 58 % did so for land services.¹ Such statistics show how discretionary power invites demands for informal payments and erodes trust.

Discretion doesn’t just lead to bribery; it also amplifies prejudice. In Europe, people with an ethnic minority or immigrant background are much more likely to be searched or asked for identity papers during police stops. The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights reports that 34 % of minorities who were stopped while on foot were searched, compared with just 14 % of the general population.² Such disparities highlight how subjective judgement in law enforcement can entrench bias.

Despite these harms, discretion persists because ambiguous laws, outdated procedures and resource constraints force officials to improvise. Yet improvised decisions lack transparency, leave no audit trail and deny citizens their right to predictable administration.

Our Vision: Rule‑Based Governance

Zwarte Peper envisions a world where the rule of law is more than an ideal – it is encoded into the everyday decisions of government. The United Nations defines the rule of law as a principle in which all persons, institutions and entities are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated.³ Adhering to this principle requires replacing arbitrary discretion with transparent, consistent application of rules. When eligibility criteria and procedural steps are digitised and published, the possibility of abuse diminishes.

Our movement seeks to build digital systems that apply existing laws faithfully and allow human oversight when true judgement is needed. By embedding auditability and citizen appeals into these systems, we can ensure that technology reinforces liberty instead of undermining it. Ultimately, when rules are clear and consistently enforced, the power to abuse them disappears.