  In this short paper we focus on human in the loop for rule-based software
used for law enforcement. For example, one can think of software that computes
fines like tachograph software, software that prepares evidence like DNA
sequencing software or social profiling software to patrol in high-risk zones,
among others. An important difference between a legal human agent and a
software application lies in possible dialogues. A human agent can be
interrogated to motivate her decisions. Often such dialogues with software are
at the best extremely hard but mostly impossible. We observe that the absence
of a dialogue can sincerely violate civil rights and legal principles like, for
example, Transparency or Contestability. Thus, possible dialogues with legal
algorithms are at the least highly desirable. Futuristic as this may sound, we
observe that in various realms of formal methods, such dialogues are easily
obtainable. However, this triggers the usual tension between the expressibility
of the dialogue language and the feasibility of the corresponding computations.
