In recent months, throughout the unending news cycle, we appeared to be living an extreme version of the movie Groundhog Day. Protests for and against the judicial overhaul, Israeli flags waved, roads blocked, collisions between police officers and protesters, and the sight of water cannons – all these images have become commonplace. Recently, a new player has entered this field, the Ayin HaNetz (Hawk Eye) system. Already installed along the roads of Israel, this system put in its first appearance at a recent demonstration, and now it might change the rules of the game for demonstrations altogether.
Ayin HaNetz is based on a set of cameras that automatically follow, capture and identify images of license plates, at all times, through advanced image processing technology. For years, this system has been in use to gather personal information and even to utilize it in legal proceedings. Surprisingly, this was done without legislation regulating the use of such far-reaching technology.
In recent months, though, against the backdrop of an ongoing petition before the High Court against the use of this system, the Knesset Internal Security Committee has been promoting a legislative initiative with the aim of creating a general framework for police use of various types of specialized camera technology (including Ayin HaNetz).
This is an important step, but there are nevertheless some concerns that must be highlighted.
First of all, there is the technical risk. Difficulties or failures in the system, or in the manner in which it is being used, could cause misidentification and lead to harassment of innocent civilians. This is not a theoretical risk, as we have seen problems with the deployment of such systems in other contexts (in the United Kingdom and the United States).
Secondly, one should also be aware of the risk of biometric information being leaked or stolen. This is a long-standing issue with all biometric databases in Israel, which suffer from problems with their management and security maintenance – an issue that both the National Cyber Authority adviser on biometric applications and the state comptroller have warned about.
Thirdly, and of particular pertinence, there is the matter of privacy. The use of databases containing personal information on countless citizens could lead to widespread surveillance for various purposes (some might not even be envisioned at this stage) in a way that infringes on the right to privacy – which is considered one of the most important human rights that underlies any democratic regime, not only in Israel.
Finally, it is important to mention the freedom of demonstration, another core right that is part of the liberties that shape the democratic character of Israel. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, this right has become a centerpiece of public life in Israel, and now we are faced with the largest protest movement in the history of our young nation.
This is an extraordinary political climate in which hundreds of thousands of Israelis are involved, and the tension level is on a constant rise. The decision to add such an overreaching technological tool to the mix might exacerbate the situation even more, and widen the gap of trust between the citizens and the police. More broadly, there could also be a chilling effect on the willingness of people to demonstrate (a concern that also arose in the context of the Shin Bet’s use of the previously top secret “the Tool,” a cellphone metadata collection put to use for tracking during the COVID-19 pandemic).
The Israeli legislator is currently in the midst of promoting regulation for the use of specialized camera systems, including Ayin HaNetz, and the logic behind the urgency to use it now, at demonstrations, is unclear. Since this process is already underway, it would be useful for the police to declare its intentions to only use this technology in adherence to the proposed law. Specifically, the police should ascertain that its collection of images is acquired in accordance with the law and that there are mechanisms in place to verify that personal data is neither being leaked nor exploited.
Otherwise, we might face yet more erosion of some of the core rights of our democracy, and of the public trust.
Dr. Tal Mimran is an international law professor at Zefat Academic College and a program director at Tachlith Institute. Adv. Eden Farber teaches at Zefat Academic College and is a researcher at the Tachlith Institute.