Facial recognition and other real-time biometrics in public spaces should be banned. This argues the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) in a response to a European Commission legislative proposal on artificial intelligence (AI). The EDPB also wants a ban on AI systems that classify people based on, for example, ethnicity, gender or sexual preference.
The EDPB consists of the privacy regulators of all EU countries. Together with the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), they responded to the bill.
The EDPB and the EDPS believe that the risks of facial recognition are too great to allow this technique in public spaces. This also applies to similar techniques, such as voice recognition and motion recognition.
The current text of the bill allows governments to use such techniques to prevent and fight crime, for example.
'A camera with facial recognition not only sees what you are doing, but it identifies you immediately. It immediately sees who you are,' says Aleid Wolfsen, chairman of the Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens AP) and vice chairman of the EDPB.
'Every camera with facial recognition that we put up on the street, in the park, the train or the bus, is one step closer to a surveillance society. A society where you never walk the streets unconstrained again. In which you cannot escape the piercing eyes of systems that keep an eye on you and recognize you, so can follow you around all day. You step out the door and know: I am constantly being watched. That's oppressive, makes people feel less free to be themselves.'
Wolfsen: "The administrator of those systems can track me automatically: he can see exactly when I go out the door, where I do my shopping, when I have a doctor's appointment, which friends I visit and where I go out to eat. Do we want that? Is the potential help these systems can provide in preventing and fighting crime worth giving up everyone's freedom? No. We live in a free, open society. That is a great thing; we must protect it.'
In addition, the EDPB and the EDPS call for a ban on AI systems that classify people into groups based on ethnicity, gender, sexuality or political affiliation. Because this encourages discrimination.
Wolfsen: "As a society, we have to fight discrimination. Discrimination by people, but also by systems. We choose to prevent systems from discriminating against people. We have seen in the Netherlands with the Supplements affair how wrong that can go.'
The EDPB and the EDPS make a third appeal: they also call for a ban on AI that recognizes emotions. Emotion recognition can have major risks to the freedom of citizens. Think of employers who give employees bad ratings if they look "angry" too often while sitting at their computers, employees who have to smile to gain access to the workplace, or police who, as a precaution, stop people who the system says are "angry" or "disgruntled" while walking down the street.
The regulators are making these calls in response to the legislative proposal on AI from the European Commission. This proposal deals with many different systems, but mainly imposes additional rules on high-risk systems for citizens. Such as algorithms that deal with surcharges or government benefits for citizens.
According to the proposal, such systems should be subject to mandatory registration. And in the future, they must be certified, to demonstrate compliance with the new law. In addition, companies are required to disclose how the systems work.
But in addition to the above calls, the EDPB and the EDPS believe the European Commission needs to improve the proposal even more.
The EDPB and the EDPS note that many rules are not yet clear enough. Which party should enforce the law and how exactly? And what exactly are the rules when systems transfer data to countries outside the EU?
In addition, the law should be well aligned with the General Data Protection Regulation (AVG), the EDPB and the EDPS believe. The current proposal contains different definitions of some terms than in the AVG. In addition, the procedures companies must follow are different than in the AVG. This creates confusion and makes it very complicated for companies and other organizations to comply with the law.
The EDPB and the EDPS agreed on this response at the June 18, 2021 EDPB meeting. The document containing this response will be published on the EDPB's site in a few days.
The EDPB and the EDPS wrote this opinion at the request of the European Commission. Later EU member states will also consider the proposal, then the European Parliament.
