This paper introduces a novel framework, "peer-induced fairness", to scientifically audit algorithmic fairness. It addresses a critical but often overlooked issue: distinguishing between adverse outcomes due to algorithmic discrimination and those resulting from individuals' insufficient capabilities. By utilizing counterfactual fairness and advanced causal inference techniques, such as the Single World Intervention Graph, this model-agnostic approach evaluates fairness at the individual level through peer comparisons and hypothesis testing. It also tackles challenges like data scarcity and imbalance, offering a flexible, plug-and-play self-audit tool for stakeholders and an external audit tool for regulators, while providing explainable feedback for those affected by unfavorable decisions.