Mass Surveillance — “Sky Eye” and Facial Recognition
The combination of the public CCTV system “Sky Eye” and facial recognition technology has given the police the capability to locate individuals automatically. The Unitary Police Service (SPU) has stated that the use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with the “Sky Eye” system has produced “satisfactory results”, despite the authorities’ claim that the two systems are separate.
Automated facial recognition should not be regarded as a mere replacement for manual review of CCTV footage. The scalability of automated recognition makes its use far more intrusive than manual review. Furthermore, in the context of data mining technology, automated surveillance enables comprehensive tracking of individuals’ movements and associations.
There are no mechanisms capable of independently verifying whether the use of facial recognition technology is confined within the scope and purposes declared by the police.
Covert Surveillance — Wiretapping
In December 2021, the Legislative Assembly passed the first reading of a draft law on the “Regime for Interception and Protection of Communications”. Although the draft proposes criminal penalties for the misuse of data collected through authorised surveillance, there remain no mechanisms for independently verifying whether the collection, retention and destruction of surveillance data are carried out in accordance with the law.
In December 2018, the President of the Court of Final Appeal acknowledged that Macau’s courts have no way to monitor whether wiretapping operations by the police are carried out within the permitted scope. Although wiretapping is subject to judicial approval, no independent watchdog is tasked with verifying compliance.
It should be noted that interception of communications may serve purposes beyond obtaining evidence for court proceedings, making effective oversight all the more important.
Observations by UN Treaty Bodies
Human Rights Committee (July 2022)
The Committee was concerned that mass surveillance activities conducted by the police are not effectively and independently monitored. It remained concerned by reports that law enforcement officials use facial recognition technology together with the “Sky Eye” public CCTV system, and that there are no legal safeguards against abuse or sufficiently independent monitoring mechanisms.
The Committee urged Macau, China to ensure that its regulations governing surveillance, including the draft legislation on wiretapping, conform to Article 17 of the Covenant and adhere strictly to the principles of legality, proportionality and necessity. It called for the establishment of independent oversight mechanisms for surveillance and interception activities.
(CCPR/C/CHN-MAC/CO/2, paras. 32–33)
Recommendations
MRG has recommended that the UN Human Rights Committee urge Macau, China to:
- Establish a mechanism with the power to independently verify the compliance of the police’s mass surveillance practices with the law; and
- Establish a mechanism with the power to independently verify the compliance of the police’s covert surveillance practices with the law.