"Surveillance vs. Privacy: Assessing the Implications of CCTV Cameras for Crime Prevention on the Right to Privacy in the UK"

openThe right to privacy is recognized as a fundamental human right in international human rights law, and is crucial to the protection of personal autonomy and dignity. The concept of privacy has been a long-standing issue in society, and its importance has increased with the advent of new technologies that allow for the collection and analysis of personal data on an unprecedented scale. Technological advancements have led to significant changes in the way privacy is perceived and protected. AI-powered surveillance systems have made it possible to monitor people's movements, activities, and behavior. While these technologies considerably help public and private agencies identify criminals and safeguard public order, they may violate people's privacy in relation to their communications, actions, and other elements. This research study examines the impact of using CCTV cameras for the purpose of crime prevention on the right to privacy in the United Kingdom. With the growing implementation of surveillance technologies, such as CCTV cameras, there is a need to critically assess their implications on individual privacy rights. This research focuses on understanding the balance between enhanced security measures and the potential infringement on privacy rights

Effects and Effectiveness of Surveillance Technologies: Mapping Perceptions, Reducing Harm

This paper addresses issues regarding perceptions of surveillance technologies in Europe. It analyses existing studies in order to explore how perceptions of surveillance affect and are affected by the negative effects of surveillance and how perceptions and effectiveness of surveillance technologies relate to each other. The paper identifies 12 negative effects of surveillance including, among others, privacy intrusion, the chilling effect and social exclusion, and classifies them into three groups. It further illustrates the different ways in which perceptions and effectiveness of surveillance interact with each other, distinguishing between perceived security and perceived effectiveness. Finally, the paper advances a methodology to take into account perception issues when designing new surveillance technologies. By doing so, it rejects manipulative measures aiming at improving perceptions only and suggests measures that address the background conditions affecting perceptions

Effects and Effectiveness of Surveillance Technologies: Mapping Perceptions, Reducing Harm

This paper addresses issues regarding perceptions of surveillance technologies in Europe. It analyses existing studies in order to explore how perceptions of surveillance affect and are affected by the negative effects of surveillance and how perceptions and effectiveness of surveillance technologies relate to each other. The paper identifies 12 negative effects of surveillance including, among others, privacy intrusion, the chilling effect and social exclusion, and classifies them into three groups. It further illustrates the different ways in which perceptions and effectiveness of surveillance interact with each other, distinguishing between perceived security and perceived effectiveness. Finally, the paper advances a methodology to take into account perception issues when designing new surveillance technologies. By doing so, it rejects manipulative measures aiming at improving perceptions only and suggests measures that address the background conditions affecting perceptions

Quantum surveillance and 'shared secrets'. A biometric step too far? CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe, July 2010

It is no longer sensible to regard biometrics as having neutral socio-economic, legal and political impacts. Newer generation biometrics are fluid and include behavioural and emotional data that can be combined with other data. Therefore, a range of issues needs to be reviewed in light of the increasing privatisation of ‘security’ that escapes effective, democratic parliamentary and regulatory control and oversight at national, international and EU levels, argues Juliet Lodge, Professor and co-Director of the Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence at the University of Leeds, U

European citizens’ beliefs and attitudes towards smart surveillance and privacy

This document presents the results of a qualitative study undertaken as part of the SMART project - “Scalable Measures for Automated Recognition Technologies” (SMART; G.A. 261727) - in the following 14 partner countries: Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Malta, Norway, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. The analysis and results are based on 42 focus group discussions comprising of 353 participants, which were held in order to examine the beliefs and attitudes of citizens towards smart surveillance and privacy.SMART Scalable Measures for Automated Recognition Technologies (G.A. 267127). The project was co-financed by the European Union within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013).peer-reviewe

Ethics and privacy issues of critical infrastructure protection – risks and possible solutions through standardization

Dieser Beitrag ist mit Zustimmung des Rechteinhabers aufgrund einer (DFG geförderten) Allianz- bzw. Nationallizenz frei zugänglich.This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.Recent studies propose a paradigm shift in standardization strategies and research and the use of ethical aspects as an additional factor to explain standardization success. This article goes one step further. It focuses on specific ethical and privacy standards and introduces privacy as a new dimension of the interplay between standards nd innovation in the fields of civil security and the protection of critical infrastructures. Based on a survey, it represents mainly German and European perspectives. The article finishes by giving recommendations for new privacy standards which may help to raise acceptance for several new security solutions

Biometric surveillance in schools : cause for concern or case for curriculum?

This article critically examines the draft consultation paper issued by the Scottish Government to local authorities on the use of biometric technologies in schools in September 2008 (see http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/09/08135019/0). Coming at a time when a number of schools are considering using biometric systems to register and confirm the identity of pupils in a number of settings (cashless catering systems, automated registration of pupils' arrival in school and school library automation), this guidance is undoubtedly welcome. The present focus seems to be on using fingerprints, but as the guidance acknowledges, the debate in future may encompass iris prints, voice prints and facial recognition systems, which are already in use in non-educational settings. The article notes broader developments in school surveillance in Scotland and in the rest of the UK and argues that serious attention must be given to the educational considerations which arise. Schools must prepare pupils for life in the newly emergent 'surveillance society', not by uncritically habituating them to the surveillance systems installed in their schools, but by critically engaging them in thought about the way surveillance technologies work in the wider world, the various rationales given to them, and the implications - in terms of privacy, safety and inclusion - of being a 'surveilled subject'

Beliefs and attitudes of citizens in Slovenia towards smart surveillance and privacy

This document presents the Slovenia results of a qualitative study undertaken as part of the SMART project – “Scalable Measures for Automated Recognition Technologies” (SMART; G.A. 261727). The analysis and results are based on a set of 3 focus group discussions comprising of 28 participants from different age groups, which were held in order to examine the awareness, understanding, beliefs and attitudes of citizens towards smart surveillance and privacy. The discussions were conducted in line with a discussion guide consisting of different scenarios aimed at stimulating a discussion among participants. While some scenarios dealt with surveillance in everyday contexts likely to be encountered by the participants, other scenarios were hypothetical in nature and their aim was to elicit the participants’ feelings, beliefs and attitudes in relation to dataveillance, the massive integration of data from different sources and the “security versus privacy” trade-off.Scalable Measures for Automated Recognition Technologies (G.A. 267127). The project was co-financed by the European Union within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013).peer-reviewe