Human rights are at stake in debate around private security cameras, expert says

Ontario's former privacy commissioner says human rights are at stake if Hamilton city council debatesletting residents and businesses point their security cameras at the street.

Privacy expert Ann Cavoukian says the city's current bylaw, which only lets people point cameras at their own property, is a good one.

"Privacy is not just a fundamental human right," she said. "It has enormous societal value. You cannot have fundamental liberty without privacy."

Next week, Coun. Sam Merulla of Ward 4 will ask city council's general issues committee to consider reversing the bylaw.

Letting people get security footage of public property will help police investigations, Merulla said. And people can already film on the street anyway.

But the current bylaw "is such a progressive decision," said Cavoukian, who spent three terms as Ontario's Information and Privacy Commissioner. She leads Ryerson University's Privacy by Design Centre of Excellence.

"There are creative ways of doing it where you can protect privacy and advance the needs of law enforcement." This includes encrypting camera footage, and only unencrypting it for police by court order.

Changing the so-called fortification bylaw,last revised in 2010, would add to an increasing trend of video surveillance in Hamilton.

In November, council voted to look at expanding video surveillance in parks to combat graffiti. This came after a test at two Mountain parks, Fay and Lisgar.

The city is adding cameras to HSR buses that face inward and outward with a goal of protecting drivers and passengers. It's also adding 1,100 cameras to 550 intersections to monitor traffic flow.

The city also has 24 red light cameras, and will double that number by 2022. In 2016, it laid 14,167 red light charges.

The fortification bylaw can lead tocharges too. Last year, Joe Moniz's home security camerascaptured a city waste contractor throwing his bins inthe truck along with his recycling. Bylaw enforcementsent Moniz a notice that his cameras werepointed the wrong way.

Under the bylaw, any cameras, "night vision" systems or electronic listening devices can only go as far as the perimeter of the user's property.

Last week,Chief Eric Girt of Hamilton Police Service said Merulla'smotion was "a good idea" for solving crime.

"When you see (footage) from a street position and it's largely widespread, you get a much broader scope," Girt said during a budget meeting.

Merulla said he was impressed by how policeused surveillance cameras tocatch the people who killed Ancaster resident Tim Bosma. Andpeople can already be photographed and filmed in public places.

"Privacy, to me, is someone's backyard," Merulla said. "That's off limits."

Otherwise, "you're allowed to walk down the street with a video camera, but you're not allowed to have your camera facing the road."

Cavoukian said it doesn't really compare. People don't typically sit in one spot and film everyone who walks down the road.

Choosing privacy or solving crime, she said, is a common false dilemmain discussions about privacy.

"There's a way you can do both."