DRONES, quick-response (QR) coded bracelets, mobile phone apps and facial recognition-enabled cameras that monitor individuals’ movements are among the technologies fast becoming norms to curb the novel coronavirus spread.
As the world struggles to manage the rapidly increasing number of infections and deaths, at least 28 countries are ramping up emergency responses via government-mandated surveillance systems, prompting concerns and outcry about privacy and personal freedoms.
FREEDOM VS SECURITY
The fear that these surveillance technologies deployed during the Covid-19 pandemic may act as a conduit for individuals’ privacy to be jeopardised is real.
In Israel, new laws have been passed to allow its domestic intelligence agency to monitor civilians beyond basic surveillance, deploying cyber measures typically reserved for counter-terrorism.
In China, its surveillance application is imposing strict instructions to citizens on whether they should be isolated or allowed to enter public areas, in addition to various high-tech systems installed to monitor the population.
These demonstrate the possibility of the most pervasive level of citizen tracking deployed, putting privacy and personal freedoms at risk.
Further, analysts warn that giving the authorities these powers may result in them being reluctant to discontinue the system once the pandemic ends.
Since the fight against the coronavirus started in Malaysia, mass surveillance in the form of drones have been deployed to ensure citizens’ compliance with the Movement Control Order (MCO).
Sarawak has rolled out a digital surveillance system that requires those being monitored to wear a QR-coded wristband.
Using Artificial Intelligence (AI), a real-time monitoring system, which can mass detect individuals in a crowd with a higher body temperature, predict individuals’ age and gender, and keep track of the person’s movement, has also been rolled out.
Furthermore, according to the Science, Technology and Innovation Minister Khairy Jamaluddin, an application is being developed to assist with contact tracing especially after the MCO is lifted.
DRAWING THE LINE
Considering these developments, it is worth looking into lessons learnt from other countries, to ensure Malaysia practises responsible surveillance amid the Covid-19 pandemic.
Towards that aim, below are some considerations.
First, surveillance systems should only be collecting public data according to the needs of public health officials and experts. This is to prevent unnecessary user data from being extracted without proper justification.
Second, transparency on how the technology works, the authority’s rationale and how it fits within the overall plan to combat Covid-19, and most importantly, how it will impact the citizens need to be communicated in plain and simple language to the public. Besides enabling citizens to understand their rights, it could also lessen their anxiety and secure their cooperation with the government.
Third, surveillance systems implemented during this pandemic should be strictly time-limited, with strong, science-based justifications needed for any potential extension. This is to ensure that the intrusions into personal privacy are proportionate to the status of the pandemic.
Fourth, individual data extracted for the purpose of monitoring and curbing the spread of Covid-19 should not be used beyond the stated intentions.
The tendency for the data to spill over and used by other agencies, despite how useful they may be, would be a violation of public trust.
DATA PROTECTION ACT
Over the immediate horizon, Malaysia needs to improve existing data privacy laws to allow data sharing in the public interest, with the necessary data security to match.
Malaysia’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) 2010 possesses loopholes as it does not protect personal data beyond commercial purposes, and does not specifically address online privacy, including geolocation data.
Moreover, despite the PDPA 2010, Malaysia’s personal data protection system is still weak, with it placing fifth-worst of the 47 countries assessed in Comparitech’s study in late 2019.
It is true that drastic moments call for drastic actions, and mass surveillance systems could undeniably assist authorities with speedier, more accurate monitoring and control of the deadly virus’ spread, making implementation more palatable to an alarmed public.
However, prioritising public health and interest during this pandemic does not have to mean sacrificing personal freedoms in turn.
The writer is a Senior Analyst at the Institute Of Strategic & International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia