The October 7 incident prompted a reevaluation of the mandatory fingerprint submission policy in Israel’s biometric database. Attorney Naama Ben-Zvi argues that while fingerprints aided the identification of victims, they do not warrant compulsory submissions from all citizens. Legislative reforms should allow individuals to choose whether to store their fingerprints, similar to organ donation preferences, ensuring personal privacy rights are upheld.
The October 7 events have reignited discussions around the usage of the national biometric database in Israel, particularly regarding the collection and use of fingerprints for identifying deceased individuals. Attorney Naama Ben-Zvi, the supervisor of biometric applications in the National Cyber Directorate, asserts that while fingerprints were beneficial in aiding identification, there is no justification for requiring all citizens to submit their fingerprints. Current regulations mandate fingerprint submissions solely when applying for an ID card or passport, stemming from recent emergency measures.
Previously, fingerprint collection was relaxed due to advancements in facial recognition technology, with citizens having had the option to provide fingerprints until storage was eliminated in 2022. Following the October 7 crisis, a temporary order imposed mandatory fingerprint submissions, enabling the police to access the biometric database to identify victims. However, Ben-Zvi emphasizes that identification methods varied, and fingerprint data from the biometric database was not a decisive factor. Of the 1,205 victims identified, only 106 were recognized via fingerprints, indicating that alternative identification methods also played crucial roles.
The recommendation stemming from this analysis is to reform legislation, granting citizens the authority to decide whether to submit their fingerprints in the biometric database. Ben-Zvi contends that forcing the population to provide fingerprints compromises personal privacy and suggests that individuals should have the freedom to choose, similar to organ donation decisions. Furthermore, existing database participants should have the option to delete their fingerprint records if they wish to do so.
This topic revolves around the use of biometric data, particularly fingerprints, for identification purposes in high-stakes situations such as identifying victims of disasters. In Israel, following the tragic events of October 7, questions have emerged regarding privacy versus security measures. The biometric database, a critical tool for identifying individuals, has faced scrutiny as the methods of gathering and using biometric data evolve. These developments underscore an ongoing dialogue about the balance between protecting citizen privacy and employing technological solutions during crises.
The analysis reveals that while the biometric database provides useful identification tools, it does not justify mandatory fingerprint submissions from all citizens. Attorney Naama Ben-Zvi’s report highlights the necessity for legislative changes that prioritize personal choice regarding biometric data while keeping the balance between individual privacy and public safety. Ultimately, the decision to participate in the biometric database should lie with the citizens, ensuring their rights are respected in the process.
Original Source: www.calcalistech.com
