Abstract: AIassisted sentencing is a key project in the construction of intelligent justice, but from the perspective of due process, it has been found that its application poses multiple challenges, e.g., the principle of procedural participation being hollowed out by automated decisionmaking, and discriminatory decisions violating the principle of procedural neutrality, etc. In fact, these challenges don't merely stem from the uncertainty of artificial intelligence, but the deeper reason is that the traditional theory of procedural justice has not included the digital space into the litigation field, ignoring the regulation of technology developers and the limitation of procedural openness not advancing to the era of explainability. Under the category of procedural justice, the technical procedural justice and traditional procedural justice are both based on the theory of dignity and judicial credibility, and the former can supplement the latter's era limitations in terms of applicable fields, regulatory objects, constituent elements, etc., so “supplementarity” should be introduced. The theory under the judicial sentencing scenarios includes the first layer of the “peopleoriented” principle, and the second layer of the compliance obligations of the sentencing system and the procedural rights of stakeholders. Under this guidance, the procedural selection system should be added, the algorithm disclosure system should be clarified, the identification system and expert assistance system should be improved, and the intelligent accountability system should be established. Furthermore, the cooperative research and development mechanism, algorithm filing mechanism, algorithm hearing mechanism and judicial training mechanism should be expanded as linkage.

Key words: due process; artificial intelligence(AI); assisted sentencing; technical procedural justice