FPÖ warns: Video surveillance must protect the citizens!

FPÖ warns: Video surveillance must protect the citizens!

Deutschland - FPÖ spokesman for the Interior, NABG. Mag. Gernot Darmann, has critically commented on the advance of Interior Minister Karner for video surveillance. While the FPÖ advocates video surveillance in general, Darmann warns of possible totalitarian circumstances that could result. He emphasizes that video surveillance should not be used across the board, but should be used specifically on so -called "crime hotspots". Only in special situations, for example to support the police in searches, does Darmann see Sinn in the application of this technology.

"It is important that the basic and freedom rights of uninvolved passers-by remain preserved," said Darmann and criticized that citizens should not be spied on for no reason. This point of view is also supported by the discussions about video surveillance in Germany, where thousands of cameras record the behavior of millions of people. In Germany, video surveillance is often used by cities, public transport companies, companies and private individuals to protect people and property as well as prevent and pursue crimes, as [BFDI] explains.

targeted monitoring and legal basics

Darmann also sees the use of video surveillance as part of the "security package", which was initiated under FPÖ Interior Minister Herbert Kickl and the ÖVP. A central element of the package is the "Quick Freeze" process, which enables official use of video surveillance data. The FPÖ also calls for more police presence and a zero line for immigration to counteract the security problems that arose, among other things, by cuts in the executive and unchecked mass immigration.

On the other hand, video surveillance is an interference with the fundamental right to informational self-determination, which becomes clear in the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In Germany, strict regulation applies, which should ensure that such measures have a legal framework and are not arbitrary. Algorithmic facial recognition technologies, some of which have been tested in pilot projects, also raise ethical questions because they can result in unfounded measures such as arrests and can increase social inequalities.

international comparisons and strategic differences

A study on video surveillance shows extreme differences in the density of the cameras worldwide. While Dubai has the highest density with over 8,500 cameras per km², Munich only has 32 cameras per km². London, on the other hand,, which has about one million public cameras, uses them almost exclusively for fighting crime, terrorist defense and traffic control. In each of these cases, however, data protection officers warn of possible interventions in privacy, and the discussion about an expansion of video surveillance in Germany often focuses on strongly frequented or crime -polluted places.

Public opinion is divided in Germany. Proponents argue that video surveillance can increase the clarification rate for crimes, while critics indicate the possible restrictions on freedom rights. Studies show that video surveillance can influence the behavior of people and leads to a chilling effect in which citizens behave in conformity in order to avoid possible disadvantages, as mentioned by [All-About Security].

The use of video surveillance technologies continues to be discussed controversially, whereby the balancing act between security and data protection is more than ever in focus.