The ADN (Alternative Democratic Party) warns that “facial biometric data is a special category of personal data because it allows the unambiguous identification of a person through their unique physical characteristics.”
This statement, according to Carolina Martins, comes in response to reports regarding the “possible implementation of facial recognition systems for attendance and access control in public and private entities,” as well as “the possible future adoption of this technology in SESARAM services.”
Carolina Martins notes that the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic expressly protects citizens in this matter. In a press release, she clarifies that “Article 26 guarantees the right to personal identity, to privacy, and to the protection of human dignity. Furthermore, Article 35 establishes guarantees regarding information technology and data processing, imposing limits on the collection, use, storage, and transmission of information relating to citizens.”
At the European level, she notes that the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) considers biometric data sensitive and subject to an enhanced protection regime. She adds that in an employment context, the processing of this data cannot be treated as a mere administrative issue. Employers must demonstrate that the use of biometrics is necessary, appropriate, and proportionate to the intended purpose, and must justify the absence of less intrusive alternatives for attendance or access control.
In certain circumstances, EU legislation also requires a prior Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) to assess risks to workers’ rights and fundamental freedoms.
Ms Martins recalls that the employment relationship is characterised by the employee’s dependence on the employer, which is why the worker’s consent is not always considered free and sufficient to legitimise the processing of biometric data.
“For this reason, any implementation of facial recognition should be accompanied by total transparency, prior information provided to workers, a clear definition of the legal basis used, guarantees regarding the security of collected data, and full respect for the principles of necessity, proportionality, and data minimisation,” she maintains.
Carolina Martins asserts that the technological modernisation of public services cannot come at the expense of reducing the fundamental guarantees of citizens, and that technological progress must coexist with respect for rights, and constitutionally protected freedoms and guarantees.
If the implementation of facial recognition systems in public or private bodies is confirmed, it is legitimate and desirable for workers, citizens, representative structures, and competent authorities to ensure full compliance with the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, the GDPR, national data protection legislation, and the fundamental principles of the Democratic Rule of Law.
She further questions whether the entities that already use or intend to use facial recognition systems actually possess all the legally required documentation, namely the legal justification for the processing of biometric data, the Data Protection Impact Assessment, the security guarantees for collected data, and mechanisms for informing and protecting workers.
Concluding, she said: “Are the entities that use or intend to use facial recognition systems prepared to demonstrate transparency, their conformity with the Constitution, the GDPR, national data protection law, and the fundamental rights of citizens? In a democratic society, the protection of biometric data does not constitute an obstacle to innovation; rather, it is an essential condition for ensuring that innovation respects human dignity, privacy, individual freedom, and citizens’ trust in institutions.
Samantha Gannon
info at madeira-weekly.com
Views: 41
