Facial recognition: what the majority intends to do and what the EU rules are
Political tension over the Artificial Intelligence legislative decree. The opposition is up in arms. The Government: “Italia will continue to comply with European legislation, starting with the AI Act, whilst upholding constitutional guarantees and civil liberties, the enforcement of which is the responsibility of the judicial authorities.”
Key points
The government’s attempt at a surprise move, the opposition’s uprising, the European Union’s veto, reassurances from Palazzo Chigi and, finally, a partial reversal by the ruling majority. This, in a nutshell, is the political turmoil that unfolded over the sensitive issue of facial recognition integrated with artificial intelligence. An issue that has also divided the centre-right once again, with Forza Italia rushing to set itself apart and champion the need to introduce safeguards and protections for rights. Meanwhile, the PD, through its secretary Elly Schlein, accuses: ‘The government argues about everything; it is out of touch with people’s problems. They should be sent straight to Big Brother: they prefer to control people rather than solve their problems.’
The Government’s acceleration
It all began on 29 July, when the Government attempted to fast-track the legislative decree transposing the European AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689) and which, following the parliamentary process, must return to the Council of Ministers for final approval. It provides that in urgent cases such as threats of terrorism or to life or personal safety, the search for missing or abducted persons, or cases of trafficking or sexual exploitation, law enforcement agencies may obtain – subject to notification, even if only verbal, to the public prosecutor – authorisation to use biometric data collected using artificial intelligence. But that is not all. The draft legislative decree also provides for the possibility that CCTV systems may be used for preventive purposes to investigate the conduct of a person suspected of alleged offences, with the authorisation of the judicial authority designated by the Chief of Police, and that the biometric data of all those entering areas affected by a public order emergency (one thinks of the demonstrations in Bologna and the No Tav protests) may be stored for seven days.
The opposition’s protest and the EU’s halt
The opposition immediately protested against these proposals, crying “police state” and emphasising in particular that the retention of biometric data for preventive purposes, before a crime has been committed, is incompatible with EU regulations. This interpretation was confirmed on 30 July by the EU Commission itself through a spokesperson who spoke at the usual morning press briefing, whilst noting that they did not have all the facts to judge the Italian case ‘in advance’. ‘Facial recognition in accessible public spaces,’ the spokesperson explained, ‘is a practice prohibited by the AI Act; therefore, it has been applicable since last year and will come into force by the end of this year. “We do not want AI to be used to monitor where we and you move about on a daily basis in accessible public spaces, so this is a clear ban.”
The suspension in the House of Commons
At the same time, in the Chamber of Deputies, the vote in the European Affairs Committee was suspended and postponed following an objection raised by Forza Italia. “Bringing national legislation into line with the European regulation on AI is a hugely significant step, particularly when it concerns the use of AI systems in police work and criminal proceedings,” commented Forza Italia’s rapporteur Cristina Rossello, who had tabled an opinion packed with critical observations. “We are talking about innovative and sensitive tools, such as real-time biometric identification, retrospective facial recognition and the use of biometric data to search for missing persons or prevent imminent threats. This is precisely why we need clear rules, robust safeguards and full protection of the individual rights recognised by national and European law.”
Reassurances from Palazzo Chigi
Shortly afterwards, sources at Palazzo Chigi stepped in to try to calm the situation, stating that ‘Italia will continue to comply with European legislation, starting with the AI Act, whilst upholding constitutional guarantees and civil liberties, the enforcement of which is the responsibility of the judicial authorities’. The same sources asserted that Italia is at the forefront of artificial intelligence governance and the rapid adoption of a comprehensive regulatory framework. The final assurance is that ‘the Government will continue to work in this direction, towards the development and application of AI that is human-centred and governed by humans’.
