Doktor Jons Guide to the "Use and Application of CCTV"
This is the "Civil Liberties" Section - Privacy and the Data Protection Act

- Civil Liberties and the DPA -

CCTV & The Data Protection Act
... who does it protect? - continued
 

So what would be the easiest way to bypass this situation?
Well, just to underline how totally nuts this piece of .... legislation is, would you believe that there is no defined time period, as to how long personal data needs to be retained. The act requires that personal data be stored for (as brief) a period appropriate for the Data Controllers requirements.

So quite obviously, if a Data Subject is caught on a Town Centre camera, and subsequently requests access to their video recordings, there is absolutely no mechanism to prevent the system operator from deleting the material, or if they are so inclined, to simply say that the records have been deleted.

A classic example of the use of video surveillance technology (or should that be the misuse) is the CCTV system that is employed to enforce the traffic Congestion Charge Scheme in Central London. With currently around 700 cameras in place, of which over a third are high resolution colour (mostly Pan, Tilt and Zoom - PTZ), the images from these cameras are only stored if they identify a vehicle which has failed to pay the appropriate fee.

At midnight, all the other vehicle recordings are ‘dumped’, so in the event that a vehicle borne terrorist attack takes place within Central London, it’s quite likely that the suspect or suspect vehicle will either a) not be recorded, or more likely b) will be recorded, but then the images will be erased at the end of the day.

The Data Protection Act is in fact a classic example of ill considered legislation, which in the context of regulating video surveillance, as well as being almost impossible to enforce, does provide absolutely ridiculous opportunities for criminals to evade capture and conviction.

Bearing in mind of course, that this is precisely the type of pointless regulation that affects the vast majority of law abiding individuals and companies, but has no apparent implications for the law defying.

If its only practical purpose is to provide a ‘get out of jail’ card for the lawless, is this really the kind of considered protection we have a right to expect from our elected government?

STOP PRESS:- During 2007, with the extension of the London Congestion Charge scheme, the number of cameras used has been hugely increased, and the retention of recordings has been significantly extended to all vehicles, as part of the capitols response to the threat of terrorism.

Recent updates to the interpretation of the Data Protection Act >>

What do you think about the issues of CCTV and Civil Liberties?

Why not tell Doktor Jon, e-mail to:- info[at]doktorjon.co.uk

IMPORTANT: No material may be reproduced, copied or redistributed from this site,
without the express written consent of doktorjon.co.uk

All the detailed information on this site is provided in good faith; as such, Doktor Jon does not accept responsibility for any consequential loss, injury or disadvantage resulting from any individual or organisation acting on the details contained herein.

© doktorjon.co.uk 2004 - 2009

Homepage...:...Gateway...:...Technical Gateway....:....Quickfind Index....:....Equipment Directory
Site Index...:...About this site....:....CCTV Helpdesk....:.... The Forum ....:....Contact Doktor Jon