The European Court of Human Rights published a decision in the case of Glukhin v. Russia, in which it found that the facial recognition system in force in Russia violates the right to privacy (Article 8). The decision is on the ECHR website.
ECHR available The applicant in the case, Muscovite Nikolai Glukhin, rode in the metro in August 2019 with a cardboard figure of political prisoner Konstantin Kotov. The figure was holding a poster with the text “Aren’t you crazy? I am Konstantin Kotov, I face up to 5 years for peaceful pickets.” Because of this, Glukhin was detained a few days later, and later fined under the article on violation of rally legislation (Part 5 of Article 20.2 of the Administrative Code). The case file included photographs of a man with a cardboard figure, compared with data from city surveillance cameras.
Having considered Glukhin’s complaint, the ECHR recognized that in his case Russian law enforcement officers violated two articles of the ECHR: on the right to private life and on freedom of expression (Article 10 of the ECHR). In its decision, the court referred to the OVD-Info report.
How authorities use cameras and facial recognition against protesters Glukhin’s interests were represented by lawyers Alexandra Rossius and Nikolai Zboroshenko. Rossius said that it was important for her to see a link to the OVD-Info report for several reasons: “Firstly, it is worth noting that the ECHR turned specifically to the examination of the project, which has data related to the majority of articles of the ECHR. In addition, we regularly challenge violations of these articles. Secondly, as the coordinator of OVD-Info volunteers, I oversaw a huge number of tasks that they did for the camera report, and I am very proud that the work of our wonderful volunteers brought such important results.”
OVD-Info lawyer Maria Nemova notes that in recent years the authorities have begun to use the surveillance system for “preventive” detentions: “That is, a person is simply on certain lists of those who could potentially go to protest, and in dangerous, according to the state, days (for example, holidays) such people are detained in order to not even give them the opportunity to exercise their right to express opinions and peacefully assemble.”