CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS ON GOVERNMENT USE OF FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY IN PUBLIC SERVICES AND PUBLIC SECURITY

Authors

  • Wiredarme Institut Pemerintahan Dalam Negeri

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69916/jkbti.v4i3.491

Keywords:

facial recognition, constitutional rights, public security, public services, biometric data, privacy

Abstract

This study aims to examine the constitutional limits of government use of facial recognition technology in public services, public security, and citizen identification. The central issue addressed in this article is the tension between state interests in security and administrative efficiency on the one hand, and the protection of privacy, civil liberties, equality, due process, and constitutional rights on the other. This study employs a qualitative legal research method with a normative-doctrinal approach. The analysis is conducted through statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches by examining constitutional principles, legal norms, regulatory frameworks, human rights standards, and recent academic literature on facial recognition, biometric governance, digital identity, and public-sector surveillance. The findings show that facial recognition is not merely a technical instrument, but a form of constitutional state action because it enables the government to collect, process, store, and act upon citizens’ biometric identity. In public services, the technology may improve verification and administrative efficiency, but it may also create forced consent and exclusion from essential services. In public security, facial recognition may support lawful identification, but it may also enable mass surveillance, chilling effects, discriminatory outcomes, and unchallengeable decisions. This study contributes a constitutional boundary framework based on legality, legitimate aim, necessity, proportionality, transparency, accountability, non-discrimination, meaningful human review, and effective remedy. The study implies that facial recognition may only be constitutionally justified when technological capability remains subject to strict rights-based legal control.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

M. Qandeel, “Facial recognition technology: regulations, rights and the rule of law,” Frontiers in Big Data, vol. 7, 2024, doi: 10.3389/fdata.2024.1354659.

X. Wang, Y.-C. Wu, M. Zhou, and H. Fu, “Beyond surveillance: privacy, ethics, and regulations in face recognition technology,” Frontiers in Big Data, vol. 7, 2024, doi: 10.3389/fdata.2024.1337465.

M. Simmler and G. Canova, “Facial recognition technology in law enforcement: Regulating data analysis of another kind,” Computer Law & Security Review, vol. 56, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106092.

A. Fletcher, “Government surveillance and facial recognition in Australia: A human rights analysis of recent developments,” Griffith Law Review, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 30–61, 2023, doi: 10.1080/10383441.2023.2170616.

G. Gabrielli, “The use of facial recognition technologies in the context of peaceful protest: The risk of mass surveillance practices and the implications for the protection of human rights,” European Journal of Risk Regulation, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 514–541, 2025, doi: 10.1017/err.2025.26.

D. Murray, “Facial recognition and the end of human rights as we know them?” Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, vol. 42, no. 2, 2024, doi: 10.1177/09240519241253061.

M. Galič and L. Stevens, “Regulating police use of facial recognition technology in the Netherlands: The complex interplay between criminal procedural law and data protection law,” New Journal of European Criminal Law, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 459–478, 2023, doi: 10.1177/20322844231212834.

N. Lynch, “Facial recognition technology in policing and security—Case studies in regulation,” Laws, vol. 13, no. 3, 2024, doi: 10.3390/laws13030035.

F. Palmiotto and N. Menéndez González, “Facial recognition technology, democracy and human rights,” Computer Law & Security Review, vol. 50, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2023.105857.

A. Shore, “Talking about facial recognition technology: How framing and context influence privacy concerns and support for prohibitive policy,” Telematics and Informatics, vol. 70, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2022.101815.

H. Choung, P. David, and T.-W. Ling, “Acceptance of AI-powered facial recognition technology in surveillance scenarios: Role of trust, security, and privacy perceptions,” Technology in Society, vol. 79, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102721.

J. Sarabdeen, “Protection of the rights of the individual when using facial recognition technology,” Heliyon, vol. 8, no. 3, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09086.

P. Dauvergne, “Facial recognition technology for policing and surveillance in the Global South: A call for bans,” Third World Quarterly, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 2325–2335, 2022, doi: 10.1080/01436597.2022.2080654.

T. Liu, B. Yang, Y. Geng, and S. Du, “Research on face recognition and privacy in China—Based on social cognition and cultural psychology,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 12, 2021, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.809736.

V. L. Raposo, “The use of facial recognition technology by law enforcement in Europe: A non-Orwellian draft proposal,” European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, vol. 29, pp. 515–533, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s10610-022-09512-y.

V. L. Raposo, “(Do not) remember my face: Uses of facial recognition technology in light of the General Data Protection Regulation,” Information & Communications Technology Law, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 45–63, 2023, doi: 10.1080/13600834.2022.2054076.

V. L. Raposo, “When facial recognition does not ‘recognise’: Erroneous identifications and resulting liabilities,” AI & Society, vol. 39, pp. 1857–1869, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s00146-023-01634-z.

G. Mobilio, “Your face is not new to me—Regulating the surveillance power of facial recognition technologies,” Internet Policy Review, vol. 12, no. 1, 2023, doi: 10.14763/2023.1.1699.

Y. Zhang, “Impact of perceived privacy and security in the TAM model: The perceived trust as the mediated factors,” International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, vol. 4, no. 2, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jjimei.2024.100270.

A. Sagana, M. Zhang, and M. Sauerland, “Public attitudes towards police use of AI-driven face recognition technology,” Computers in Human Behavior, 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2025.108821.

N. Martin and F. M. Metzger, “What determines the acceptance of digital identity and facial recognition-based technologies? Evidence from an eID system and a multi-country survey,” Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 129–173, 2025, doi: 10.24840/2183-0606_013.002_0006.

P. Fussey, B. Davies, and M. Innes, “‘Assisted’ facial recognition and the reinvention of suspicion and discretion in digital policing,” The British Journal of Criminology, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 325–344, 2021, doi: 10.1093/bjc/azaa068.

L. Urquhart and D. Miranda, “Policing faces: The present and future of intelligent facial surveillance,” Information & Communications Technology Law, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 194–219, 2022, doi: 10.1080/13600834.2021.1994220.

Downloads

Published

2025-09-29

PlumX Metrics

Scite Metrics

Altmetric

How to Cite

[1]
Wiredarme, “CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS ON GOVERNMENT USE OF FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY IN PUBLIC SERVICES AND PUBLIC SECURITY”, JKBTI, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 356–363, Sep. 2025.