92% of cameras are not GDPR compliant and video surveillance infringements cost businesses € 4 million. Italian cities are becoming more and more digital and invaded by cameras, but respect for citizens’ privacy does not go hand in hand.
In fact, the results that emerge from a study conducted by Federprivacy in collaboration with Ethos Academy are of particular concern with the aim of taking a realistic photograph on compliance with the legislation on the protection of personal data in the world of video surveillance.
According to the report drawn up by the Federprivacy Observatory, out of a sample of about 2,000 people who were asked what they observe when they enter a public establishment equipped with a surveillance system, only 8% of cases show a regular cartel of minimum information that clearly and transparently warns the presence of cameras with an indication of the correct regulatory references and complete information that must be provided to the interested party, while the remaining 92% of those interviewed reported that they found themselves in the face of situations of obvious non-compliance with the provisions of the GDPR, noting the presence of signs that report incorrect, incomplete information or with obsolete regulatory references (54%), or not seeing any warning at all (38%).
And apparently, most of the responsibilities are attributable to the lack of sensitivity still shown by the same insiders who install the video surveillance systems: in this case the sample of designers and installers who agreed to be interviewed after participating in a session were 1,127, and less than half of these (46%) recognize that privacy issues are complex and involve high risks of sanctions, especially in the geographical areas of southern Italy, where it was found that only 3% of their companies membership have a Data Protection Officer or another contact person for privacy issues, and from the same geographical area there are only 15% of those who feel the need to deepen the matter. 54% of designers and installers do not care that much about data protection, and 31% of these think that the privacy risks are of medium level, while 23% consider the risk even low.
Therefore, the awareness and sensitivity for the protection of privacy for most of the professionals is scarce, despite the Guidelines no. 3/2019 published by the European guarantors have provided for more than two years all the necessary clarifications and also a new model of cartel that still struggles to replace the old notices that refer to the repealed Article 13 of Legislative Decree 196/2003, and that often they are not even filled in with the indications of the data controller and with the space of the purposes of the cameras left blank.
If the Italian picture outlined by the “Video surveillance & Privacy between citizens, professionals and businesses 2022” leaves something to be desired, not even the European scenario of sanctions in this area is too encouraging, in fact if there are data protection authorities that do their part, such as those of Italy, Austria, Germany, Romania, Luxembourg, and the Spanish one (AEPD) which has imposed as many as 93 sanctions for a total value of almost three million euros, equal to 73% of the total of the entire EU area (177 measures for a total of € 4,076,911) for this type of infringement, on the other hand there are as many as 9 guarantors who since the introduction of the European Regulation have never sanctioned a violation for non-compliance relating to cameras and video surveillance.
* Nicola Bernardi is the president of Federprivacy