Author: kanak Vashisth
To the point
Around the world, surveillance systems are progressively adopting artificial intelligence technologies. From monitoring public events’ facial recognition to traffic pattern tracking, AI has proven integral to law enforcement and public safety. This technology is argued to enhance safety and help in crime determent. However, the spectrum of personal privacy concerns is increasing. As AI surveillance systems become more and more adopted, is there any chance personal liberties and public safety are balanced.
Use of legal jargon
the core of what makes democratic societies tick. If we’re going to decide whether this tech is keeping us safe or just trampling all over our rights, we need to get real about the key legal doctrines and human rights standards in play.
Right to Privacy
This is foundational. It means your personal life, conversations, and data aren’t just open season for the state or random corporations. There’s supposed to be a line, and crossing it isn’t taken lightly.
Proportionality
Here’s the guiding principle: any intrusion into someone’s rights has to actually fit the goal. If public safety’s on the line, sure, some surveillance might be justified—but only if there’s no less invasive option. Using AI to monitor everything when simpler solutions exist? That’s not proportional, and it shouldn’t fly.
Due Process
Surveillance systems can’t be a lawless zone. There must be established procedures and oversight—think judicial checks—to prevent arbitrary or politically motivated targeting. Otherwise, it’s open season for misuse.
The proof
Good Stuff: When AI Actually Helps
London, UK
So, the cops in London have gone all sci-fi and started using live facial recognition in packed spots—think Oxford Circus on a Saturday. They’re catching wanted folks, even some with really nasty charges. Police say it’s sped things up, and hey, maybe now they can grab a cup of tea between arrests.
Beijing, China
China’s “Skynet” (yeah, they really picked that name, Terminator fans) has over 600 million—yep, million—AI cameras watching everything. Jaywalkers, pickpockets, that guy double-parking—someone’s always watching. Sure, people grumble about Big Brother, but officials claim it’s the secret sauce keeping crowded cities under control.
India’s Trains & Airports
Over in India, you’ve got AI at train stations and airports scanning faces like a high-tech game of Guess Who. It’s not just for show—missing kids, wanted suspects, weird behavior, you name it. They’ve actually found lost kids and busted criminals this way, which is pretty wild.
Not-So-Great: Where AI Goes Off the Rails
Bias in the U.S.
Here’s where things get messy. Studies (shoutout MIT and Georgetown) show facial recognition tech loves to screw up, especially with Black and Brown folks. Cops have arrested the wrong people because of it. That’s not just awkward—it’s life-ruining.
Watching Protesters
In the U.S., UK, Russia—you name it—the government’s been caught using these tools to watch peaceful protesters. Not exactly the best way to encourage free speech. Most folks didn’t even know they were being watched, which is seriously sketchy. Makes you think twice about holding up a sign, huh?
No One’s Telling You Anything
A lot of governments are pretty tight-lipped about how they use this stuff. Nobody really knows when or where their faces are being scanned or tracked. So, privacy? Kind of a joke.
Abstract
AI systems that actually help cops catch bad guys, find lost kids, or even speed up rescue when stuff goes sideways. That sounds great, right? Public safety for the win.
But—yeah, there’s always a “but”—it’s not sunshine and rainbows. There’s some seriously sketchy stuff going on, especially when you dig into the U.S. scene. Turns out, those algorithms? They screw up more when it comes to people of color. Not cool. And that’s just the start. Governments have started using AI to keep an eye on protests—peaceful ones, mind you—and there’s barely any info on how any of this is being used. Add to that the whole “authoritarian regimes love this tech for all the wrong reasons” thing, and you’ve got a recipe for privacy nightmares. Civil liberties, human right yeah, they’re all kind hanging by a thread here.
Case laws
R v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2020] EWCA Civ 1058 — UK
So, South Wales Police got called out big time. The Court of Appeal basically said, “Yeah, you can’t just roll out live facial recognition tech without clear rules, decent data protection, or any real safety net.” This case set the bar: if you’re gonna spy on people with AI, you better follow the rules and not just wing it.
Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. ___ (2018) — US
Over in the States, the Supreme Court wasn’t having it either. The government thought it could grab people’s cell location data without a warrant. The Court shut that down, saying, “Hey, ever heard of privacy?” Warrantless snooping? Not cool, apparently. Fourth Amendment still means something.
Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v. Minister for Communications [2014] CJEU C-293/12 — EU
Europe doesn’t mess around with privacy. The top EU court trashed the Data Retention Directive because, honestly, it tried to treat everyone like a suspect. Mass surveillance without a real reason? Not happening. Articles 7 and 8 of the EU Charter say no dice.
Conclusion
Look, AI in public surveillance can be super useful—catching bad guys, keeping things safe, handling emergencies. But when governments start using this tech with no rules or oversight? Yikes. That’s a fast track to crushing privacy, free speech, and due process.
Courts everywhere are starting to draw some lines in the sand. Blanket surveillance with zero transparency or checks is a legal dumpster fire. Proportionality is the name of the game: don’t let the shiny new tech bulldoze basic rights.
If AI surveillance stays within the guardrails—legal, necessary, and actually proportionate—it’s a tool, not a threat. But without real data protection, accountability, and judges watching the watchers? That’s how you get a surveillance state nobody signed up for.
FAQs
Q1: Is AI surveillance legal in democratic countries?
Yes, but it must follow strict rules about privacy, consent, and due process.
Q2: Can AI surveillance be challenged in court?
Absolutely. If someone’s rights are violated, they can file a case under privacy or data protection laws.
Q3: Why is facial recognition controversial?
Because it often makes mistakes and can unfairly target certain groups, especially minorities and women.
Q4: Are private companies also using AI surveillance?
Yes. Many businesses use AI for security, but they are also required to follow data protection laws.
Q5: Has any place banned AI surveillance?
Yes. Some U.S. cities like San Francisco have banned facial recognition by public agencies due to privacy concerns.
