Facts
On 23 August 2019 the applicant travelled on the Moscow underground with a life-size cardboard figure of a protester whose case had drawn wide media attention, holding a banner saying he faced up to five years for peaceful protests. Police found photographs and a video of the demonstration on a public social-media channel. According to the applicant, they used facial recognition to identify him, collected CCTV footage from the stations he had passed through and, several days later, used live facial recognition to locate and arrest him on the underground. He was convicted of an administrative offence for failing to notify a solo demonstration and fined 20,000 roubles.
Question
The question before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) was whether processing the applicant's biometric data through facial recognition in administrative-offence proceedings, and convicting him, were compatible with Article 8 (private life) and Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the Convention. Because Russian law does not require the police to record their use of the technology or to notify the person concerned, proving that it had been used was itself a difficulty. The Court also had to confirm its jurisdiction, Russia having ceased to be a party to the Convention on 16 September 2022.
Decision
The Court found that it had jurisdiction because the facts occurred before 16 September 2022, and unanimously found violations of Articles 8 and 10. It accepted that facial recognition had been used, since there was no other explanation for how quickly the applicant was identified and the Government had not explicitly denied it. The interference had a legal basis, but domestic law lacked detailed rules on the scope and application of the technology and strong safeguards against abuse. Identifying and arresting the applicant for a peaceful protest that posed no danger to public order did not answer a 'pressing social need'. Russia was ordered to pay EUR 9,800 in non-pecuniary damage and EUR 6,400 in costs.
Why it matters
Glukhin is the ECtHR's first judgment dealing directly with facial recognition technology. Stressing how intrusive live facial recognition is, the Court required detailed rules and strong safeguards against abuse and arbitrariness before such technology can be used. The judgment also dealt with the difficulty of proving that the technology was used where the police are under no duty to record its use: the Court accepted that it had been used because there was no other explanation and the Government had not explicitly denied it.
Related stages
The Chamber judgment became final on 4 October 2023.