CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 InternationalLiang, Guangda2026-01-122026-01-10Liang, G. (2026) “Governing the amorphous: AI, social justice, and the challenge of future-proof regulation,” Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 13, p. 102467. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.102467.2590-2911https://eresearch.qmu.ac.uk/handle/20.500.12289/14573https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.102467The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into the core functions of society presents a profound governance challenge, forcing nations to reconsider the very nature of their social contracts. This paper examines the global effort to regulate AI through a deep and critical analysis of Canada's proposed Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA). While Canada's adoption of a risk-based framework aligns with emerging international norms, this paper argues that the legislation in its current form is procedurally flawed and substantively hollow, failing to adequately address the deep societal risks posed by AI, particularly concerning social justice, fundamental human rights, and democratic accountability. Through a multi-layered critical analysis of the legislative text, contextualized by a detailed comparison with the European Union's more mature AI Act, this paper deconstructs three core weaknesses that hold urgent lessons for policymakers worldwide: (1) a profound reliance on ambiguous definitions and unfettered executive discretion, which creates a dangerous democratic deficit and denies legal certainty to citizens and innovators alike; (2) the conspicuous absence of a strong, independent, and technically proficient regulator, a decision that undermines public trust and neuters enforcement capacity; and (3) a systemic failure to ground the legislation in a rights-based framework that provides effective, accessible, and meaningful redress for individuals harmed by increasingly powerful algorithmic systems. Ultimately, this paper uses the Canadian example to argue that effective AI governance requires far more than technical rules or industry-led standards; it demands a robust and reimagined social contract for the algorithmic age. It concludes by proposing a comprehensive, “Multi-Pillar Governance Model” centered on legislative clarity, independent oversight, mandatory accountability mechanisms, and, most critically, the substantive empowerment of citizens to understand, challenge, and seek justice from the automated decisions that impact their lives.102467en© 2026 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ).http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Artificial IntelligenceGovernanceTechnology and SocietySocial JusticeAlgorithmic AccountabilityRegulationTechnology PolicyHuman RightsAdministrative LawDemocracyArticle10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.102467