In the Netherlands, the police monitor peaceful protesters with highly advanced cameras such as drones and video surveillance cars. This practice violates the right to privacy, has a chilling effect on the right to peaceful assembly and may have discriminatory effects. Amnesty International calls for the prohibition of mass surveillance tools and for robust safeguards for all camera surveillance during protests.
- Index Number
- EUR 35/8469/2024
- Pages
- 33
- Published in
- United Kingdom
Files
Table of Contents
- CONTENTS 2
- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
- METHODOLOGY 5
- 1. DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY IN POLICING PROTESTS PRACTICE 7
- AND POLICY IN THE NETHERLANDS 7
- 1.1 DIGITAL SURVEILLANCE TOOLS ARE EVERYWHERE 7
- 1.2 VIDEO SURVEILLANCE CARS DRONES AND MORE 8
- 2. THE COLLECTION OF DATA 11
- 2.1 LOOKING RIGHT AT YOU INTERFERENCE WITH PRIVACY 11
- 2.2 ITS UNPREDICTABLE LACK OF REGULATION 12
- 2.3 CAMERAS ARE NOT PROTECTING US NO LEGITIMATE AIM 15
- 2.4 WE ARE NOT HERE TO CAUSE TROUBLE INADEQUATE ASSESSMENT OF 17
- NECESSITY AND PROPORTIONALITY 17
- 3. WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE DATA 19
- 3.1 WITHOUT CONSENT OR EVEN WITHOUT YOU KNOWING LACK OF 19
- TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 19
- 3.2 ARE THEY RUNNING MY FACE THROUGH A DATABASE FACIAL 21
- RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY 21
- 3.3 OUR MESSAGE IS NOT WANTED DISCRIMINATORY IMPACT 23
- 3.4 CAMERAS MAKE YOU CAUTIOUS THE CHILLING EFFECTS OF SURVEILLANCE 26
- RECOMMENDATIONS 30
- ANNEX EXAMPLES OF CAMERA USE PROVIDED BY THE 32
- POLICE 32