The Surveillance Camera Code of Practice is a code of practice devoted to the operation of CCTV systems in the United Kingdom particularly in England and Wales. It was introduced under Section 30 (1) (a) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. This code of practice was established in response to growing concerns regarding the potential abuse or misuse of surveillance technologies by governmental bodies such as local authorities and police forces, particularly in public spaces. [1]
The need for such a code arose due to apprehensions surrounding the unchecked expansion of surveillance capabilities by state entities, and the potential implications for civil liberties and privacy rights. In England and Wales, the Home Office took action to address these concerns by introducing the code, which emphasizes the responsible and accountable use of surveillance cameras. [1]
The code applies not only to public bodies but also encourages compliance from private operators of surveillance systems. It sets out clear guidelines for the use, access, retention, and security of data collected through surveillance cameras. Furthermore, it advocates for adherence to operational, technical, and competency standards to ensure the lawful and ethical use of surveillance technologies.
Under the auspices of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, the position of Surveillance Camera Commissioner was established to oversee the implementation of the code. The commissioner, currently Andrew Rennison, is tasked with promoting compliance, evaluating the effectiveness of the code, and recommending any necessary amendments.
The code mandates that surveillance cameras must be employed only for specific and legitimate purposes, and only when there is a pressing need to do so. Additionally, it emphasizes transparency, accountability, and the protection of individual privacy rights.
While proponents of the code argue that it represents a significant step towards ensuring the responsible deployment of surveillance technologies, critics, such as the campaign group Big Brother Watch, contend that it does not go far enough in safeguarding individual privacy rights. [1] They argue for broader applicability of the code, stricter enforcement mechanisms, and enhanced accountability for breaches.
Privacy is the ability of an individual or group to seclude themselves or information about themselves, and thereby express themselves selectively.
The right to privacy is an element of various legal traditions that intends to restrain governmental and private actions that threaten the privacy of individuals. Over 185 national constitutions mention the right to privacy. On December 10, 1948, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR); while the right to privacy does not appear in the document, many interpret this through Article 12, which states: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with their privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."
Medical privacy, or health privacy, is the practice of maintaining the security and confidentiality of patient records. It involves both the conversational discretion of health care providers and the security of medical records. The terms can also refer to the physical privacy of patients from other patients and providers while in a medical facility, and to modesty in medical settings. Modern concerns include the degree of disclosure to insurance companies, employers, and other third parties. The advent of electronic medical records (EMR) and patient care management systems (PCMS) have raised new concerns about privacy, balanced with efforts to reduce duplication of services and medical errors.
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) is a Washington, D.C.-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organisation that advocates for digital rights and freedom of expression. CDT seeks to promote legislation that enables individuals to use the internet for purposes of well-intent, while at the same time reducing its potential for harm. It advocates for transparency, accountability, and limiting the collection of personal information.
A privacy policy is a statement or legal document that discloses some or all of the ways a party gathers, uses, discloses, and manages a customer or client's data. Personal information can be anything that can be used to identify an individual, not limited to the person's name, address, date of birth, marital status, contact information, ID issue, and expiry date, financial records, credit information, medical history, where one travels, and intentions to acquire goods and services. In the case of a business, it is often a statement that declares a party's policy on how it collects, stores, and releases personal information it collects. It informs the client what specific information is collected, and whether it is kept confidential, shared with partners, or sold to other firms or enterprises. Privacy policies typically represent a broader, more generalized treatment, as opposed to data use statements, which tend to be more detailed and specific.
Privacy law is a set of regulations that govern the collection, storage, and utilization of personal information from healthcare, governments, companies, public or private entities, or individuals.
Source protection, sometimes also referred to as source confidentiality or in the U.S. as the reporter's privilege, is a right accorded to journalists under the laws of many countries, as well as under international law. It prohibits authorities, including the courts, from compelling a journalist to reveal the identity of an anonymous source for a story. The right is based on a recognition that without a strong guarantee of anonymity, many would be deterred from coming forward and sharing information of public interests with journalists.
Canadian privacy law is derived from the common law, statutes of the Parliament of Canada and the various provincial legislatures, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Perhaps ironically, Canada's legal conceptualization of privacy, along with most modern legal Western conceptions of privacy, can be traced back to Warren and Brandeis’s "The Right to Privacy" published in the Harvard Law Review in 1890, Holvast states "Almost all authors on privacy start the discussion with the famous article 'The Right to Privacy' of Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis".
Information technology law, also known as information, communication and technology law or cyberlaw, concerns the juridical regulation of information technology, its possibilities and the consequences of its use, including computing, software coding, artificial intelligence, the internet and virtual worlds. The ICT field of law comprises elements of various branches of law, originating under various acts or statutes of parliaments, the common and continental law and international law. Some important areas it covers are information and data, communication, and information technology, both software and hardware and technical communications technology, including coding and protocols.
Privacy by design is an approach to systems engineering initially developed by Ann Cavoukian and formalized in a joint report on privacy-enhancing technologies by a joint team of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (Canada), the Dutch Data Protection Authority, and the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research in 1995. The privacy by design framework was published in 2009 and adopted by the International Assembly of Privacy Commissioners and Data Protection Authorities in 2010. Privacy by design calls for privacy to be taken into account throughout the whole engineering process. The concept is an example of value sensitive design, i.e., taking human values into account in a well-defined manner throughout the process.
New Zealand is committed to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which contain a right to privacy. Privacy law in New Zealand is dealt with by statute and the common law. The Privacy Act 2020 addresses the collection, storage and handling of information. A general right to privacy has otherwise been created in the tort of privacy. Such a right was recognised in Hosking v Runting [2003] 3 NZLR 385, a case that dealt with publication of private facts. In the subsequent case C v Holland [2012] NZHC 2155 the Court recognised a right to privacy in the sense of seclusion or a right to be free from unwanted intrusion.
The use of electronic surveillance by the United Kingdom grew from the development of signal intelligence and pioneering code breaking during World War II. In the post-war period, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) was formed and participated in programmes such as the Five Eyes collaboration of English-speaking nations. This focused on intercepting electronic communications, with substantial increases in surveillance capabilities over time. A series of media reports in 2013 revealed bulk collection and surveillance capabilities, including collection and sharing collaborations between GCHQ and the United States' National Security Agency. These were commonly described by the media and civil liberties groups as mass surveillance. Similar capabilities exist in other countries, including western European countries.
The International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance is a document officially launched at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in September 2013 by the Electronic Frontier Foundation which attempts to "clarify how international human rights law applies in the current digital environment". Communications surveillance conflicts with a number of international human rights, mainly that of privacy. As a result, communications surveillance may only occur when prescribed by law necessary to achieve legitimate aim, and proportionate to the aim used.
Smart cities seek to implement information and communication technologies (ICT) to improve the efficiency and sustainability of urban spaces while reducing costs and resource consumption. In the context of surveillance, smart cities monitor citizens through strategically placed sensors around the urban landscape, which collect data regarding many different factors of urban living. From these sensors, data is transmitted, aggregated, and analyzed by governments and other local authorities to extrapolate information about the challenges the city faces in sectors such as crime prevention, traffic management, energy use and waste reduction. This serves to facilitate better urban planning and allows governments to tailor their services to the local population.
The Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Act 2015(Cth) is an Act of the Parliament of Australia that amends the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (original Act) and the Telecommunications Act 1997 to introduce a statutory obligation for Australian telecommunication service providers (TSPs) to retain, for a period of two years, particular types of telecommunications data (metadata) and introduces certain reforms to the regimes applying to the access of stored communications and telecommunications data under the original Act.
The National Privacy Commission, or NPC, is an independent body created under Republic Act No. 10173 or the Data Privacy Act of 2012, mandated to administer and implement the provisions of the Act, and to monitor and ensure compliance of the country with international standards set for data protection. It is attached to the Philippines' Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) for purposes of policy coordination, but remains independent in the performance of its functions. The Commission safeguards the fundamental human right of every individual to privacy, particularly Information privacy while ensuring the free flow of information for innovation, growth, and national development.
The Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner is an independent advisor to the UK government created under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Their role is to review the use and retention of biometrics by police, and to encourage compliance with the surveillance camera code of practice. The Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner is an independent monitoring body of the Home Office.
Privacy and the United States government consists of enacted legislation, funding of regulatory agencies, enforcement of court precedents, creation of congressional committees, evaluation of judicial decisions, and implementation of executive orders in response to major court cases and technological change. Because the United States government is composed of three distinct branches governed by both the separation of powers and checks and balances, the change in privacy practice can be separated relative to the actions performed by the three branches.
The campus privacy officer (CPO) is a position within a post-secondary university that ensures that student, faculty, and parent privacy is maintained. The CPO role was created because of growing privacy concerns across college campuses. The responsibilities of the CPO vary depending on the specific needs of the campus community. Their daily tasks may include drafting new privacy policies for their respective college campus, creating a curriculum that informs teachers and students about privacy, helping to investigate any privacy breaches within the university, and ensuring that the university is abiding by current state and federal privacy laws. CPOs are also responsible for connecting with student and faculty groups across the entire campus in order to understand the privacy concerns of the campus. The role of CPO is an expanding profession within the United States and other countries, such as Canada and South Africa. There are numerous organizations that exist to provide training for CPOs and support them.
Airport privacy involves the right of personal privacy for passengers when it comes to screening procedures, surveillance, and personal data being stored at airports. This practice intertwines airport security measures and privacy specifically the advancement of security measures following the 9/11 attacks in the United States and other global terrorist attacks. Several terrorist attacks, such as 9/11, have led airports all over the world to look to the advancement of new technology such as body and baggage screening, detection dogs, facial recognition, and the use of biometrics in electronic passports. Amidst the introduction of new technology and security measures in airports and the growing rates of travelers there has been a rise of risk and concern in privacy.