§21 · Lane 1 — Rules-as-Code / Law-as-Code
A Methodology for Compliance of AI Systems the bridge between audit and policy-as-code
Amantea, Governatori, Quaranta (2026) · CLSR 61
Bibliographic data
- Title
- Amantea, Governatori, Quaranta (2026) — A methodology for compliance of AI systems
- Authors / Issuing body
- Ilaria Angela Amantea, Guido Governatori, Marinella Quaranta
- Venue / Publisher
- Computer Law and Security Review 61 (2026) 106272
- Year
- 2026
- Designation
- Academic
- Licence
- DOI — refer to publisher for full licence terms.
- Canonical link
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2026.106272
How to cite
Amantea, Governatori, Quaranta (2026). Amantea, Governatori, Quaranta (2026) — A methodology for compliance of AI systems. Computer Law and Security Review 61 (2026) 106272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2026.106272.
Applies defeasible deontic logic — the Governatori computational-law lineage — to AI-system compliance, bridging the AI-audit-and-accountability literature and policy-as-code. The formal tradition that the Law-to-Code Methodology applies in practice.
Why it matters for NETEVO
Amantea, Governatori, and Quaranta (2026) applies defeasible deontic logic to AI-system compliance. Governatori is the foundational name in defeasible-deontic-logic treatments of law — the formalism that captures how legal obligations actually compose: general rule, then exceptions, then exceptions to those exceptions.
An academic lineage for compliance engineering. NETEVO's Law-to-Code Methodology is a practitioner application of the Governatori tradition: it delivers defeasible-deontic-logic compliance against ISO/IEC 42001 and the Australian regulatory surface, and it sits alongside the Australian implementation literature (Mowbray, Chung, and Greenleaf) and the rule-of-law critique (Burton Crawford) rather than in competition with them.
A single-paper bridge between audit and policy-as-code. The paper sits at the join between the AI-audit-and-accountability literature and the policy-as-code literature: a defeasible-deontic-logic specification is simultaneously a compliance artefact that an auditor can inspect and a runtime policy artefact that a system can execute. Few single papers do that work as cleanly.
The fourth corner of the Rules-as-Code debate. With this paper, the contemporary Rules-as-Code debate has four corners: implementation (Mowbray, Chung, and Greenleaf), language design (Catala), constitutional critique (Burton Crawford), and formal methodology (Amantea, Governatori, and Quaranta). Read together, the four corners cover how legislative rules are coded, in what language, on what formal method, and whether they should be coded at all.