Sabic: Possible Abuse of So-Called Smart Surveillance System

Rodoljub Sabic (Beta/Milan Obradovic)

Lawyer and expert on the right to privacy Radoljub Sabic on Nov. 14 voiced his concern about the fact that the authorities “have been persistently avoiding” giving the public any information about the installation and functioning of the Safe City system, which comprises a network of so-called smart surveillance cameras.

 “It is absurd that the citizens of Belgrade and Serbia are informed about the said system – and only partially at that – through the information provided by its manufacturer, Huawei, instead of receiving complete information they undoubtedly have the right to from the authorities of their own country,” Sabic told BETA.

Sabic, a former Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection, believes that the question of whether the introduction of this system, which “certainly invades the privacy of a large number of citizens,” is truly justified, and what serious analysis is it based on, should rightly be asked.

“Given the fact that the system is made to quickly and automatically indentify anyone whose picture is in the Ministry of Interior’s database (and that means anyone who is of legal age, and not a small number of minors), what are the odds of having [the system] used not to fight crime, but to, for instance, track the movement of government opponents, and similar,” he asked.

Another question Sabic raised is to what extent is not disclosing cameras’ locations in accordance with the constitutional and legal provisions pertaining to surveillance and tracking.

“If according to the information disclosed by Huawei, the Ocean Store system is capable of processing a huge quantity of data in a remarkable number of ways – which are these specific situations which justify the use of such a system in Belgrade and Serbia,” Sabic also asked.

“If the gathered data is stored on Huawei servers, where are these servers located? If they are outside the country, say, in China, what laws and regulations allow sending abroad personal information on our citizens? What justifies this? Is it illegal?” Sabic asked.  

He added that China has not signed the Convention 108 SE on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data, nor is it on the list of countries considered to ensure “an appropriate level of personal data protection,” which, by law, our Government determines.

“It’s absurd and a cause for concern that this and other questions, including the one about the cost of the project (after all, it’s the citizens who are paying for it), our government persistently treats like secrets and denies the public [the answers],” Sabic concluded.