The European Court of Human Rights issues Landmark Judgment on Facial Recognition Technology

05-07-2023

Sofía Medina Sánchez 

International Justice and Human Rights Researcher 

Global Human Rights Defence 

On the 4th of July 2023, the European Court of Human Rights issued the Glukhin v. Russia judgment condemning Russia for a violation of the applicant’s freedom of expression and privacy, given the use of facial recognition to arrest and locate a protester whilst travelling on the Moscow underground. 

The case concerned the use of facial recognition technology by the Russian authorities against Mr Glukhin, a protester who staged a “solo demonstration” in the Moscow underground holding a life-size cardboard figure of Konstantin Kotov, a political activist whose case gained considerable media attention causing a public outcry. The police encountered photographs and a video of said demonstration on social media. According to the applicant, the police used facial recognition technology to identify him on social media and collected video-recordings from the CCTV cameras in the Moscow underground. On this account, he was convicted for failing to notify the authorities of the solo demonstration. Both the screenshots of the social media site and the CCTV footage were used as evidence against him in the administrative proceedings. 

The court found a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression (recognised under Article 10 ECHR) and his right to private and family life, guaranteed under Article 8 ECHR. With respect to the right to freedom of expression, the court declared that the solo demonstration was peaceful and non-disruptive and that there were no relevant or sufficient reasons to justify the interference in the applicant’s right. The Strasbourg court concluded that the interference was not necessary in a democratic society and thereby unlawful. 

Regarding the right to private and family life, the court recognised the difficulty of proving the use of facial recognition by the Russian authorities. However, there was no other explanation to suggest how the police had identified him so quickly and the Russian authorities did not deny the use of facial recognition either, but rather implicitly acknowledged its use. The interference in the applicant’s right was not justified because it was not necessary in a democratic society and did not respond to a “pressing social need”. Given that the measures were particularly intrusive, and that the data collected was sensitive thus deserving a stronger protection, the justification for an interference was higher. 

This landmark decision serves as a powerful reminder that these technologies are often exploited to target individuals and groups, such as protestors, journalists, and activists, who actively uphold democratic principles. As the Strasbourg court stated: “The use of highly intrusive facial recognition technology to identify and arrest participants of peaceful protest actions could have a chilling effect in regard of the rights to freedom of expression and assembly”. Therefore, their use should be carefully regulated, and their misuse condemned. 

Sources and further readings: 

Case of Glukhin v. Russia (Application no.11519/20), Judgement, Third Section, 4 July 2023: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/#%7B%22itemid%22:[%22001-225655%22]%7D

Legal Summary issued by the Registrar to the Court, Glukhin v. Russia - 11519/20

Judgment 4.7.2023 [Section III], 4 July 2023: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press/#{%22fulltext%22:[%2222515/14%22]

Article 19, ‘European Court of Human Rights: Groundbreaking ruling on facial recognition,’ (Article 19, 2023): https://www.article19.org/resources/european-court-of-human-rights-groundbreaking-ruling-on-facial-recognition/.