Facial Recognition Technology and the Proportionality Test (Current Events)
Facial Recognition Technology and the Proportionality Test (Current Events)
Why In News:
The Supreme Court has agreed to examine the 'proportionality' of using Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) by police during a NEET protest, reviving the debate on the limits of technological surveillance versus the fundamental right to privacy.
What is Facial Recognition Technology?
Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) is a biometric technology that identifies or verifies a person by analysing distinctive facial features from photographs, CCTV footage or live video feeds.
It generally works by converting facial characteristics into a digital biometric template and comparing it with images stored in a database.
In India, law-enforcement agencies have explored FRT for criminal identification, missing-person searches, crowd monitoring and investigation, while its use in public spaces has also raised concerns over privacy and surveillance.
Why is FRT Controversial in Protest Surveillance?
The use of FRT to identify protesters can enable the State to track individuals participating in demonstrations, potentially affecting the exercise of the right to peaceful assembly under Article 19(1)(b).
Continuous or indiscriminate facial surveillance may also interfere with the right to privacy.
Such surveillance may create a “chilling effect”, whereby citizens refrain from participating in lawful protests because they fear identification or subsequent State action.
The Constitutional Proportionality Test
In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017), the Supreme Court recognised privacy as a fundamental right, primarily flowing from Article 21, while also linking it to the broader guarantees of liberty and dignity.
Any State action that restricts a fundamental right must satisfy the proportionality principle, which provides a framework for determining whether the restriction is constitutionally justified.
Therefore, the use of FRT for identifying protesters would need to demonstrate not merely its usefulness but also necessity, safeguards and proportionality in relation to the specific State objective.