Hungary’s new amendments introduced biometric surveillance laws violating the EU AI Act, expanding facial recognition technology to minor infractions and peaceful protests. This has raised fears of a chilling effect on civil liberties, particularly among LGBTQAI+ groups. The EU must intervene to ensure compliance with fundamental rights and safeguard democratic principles.
In Hungary, recent amendments to biometric surveillance laws have sparked serious concerns regarding their compliance with the EU Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act). The controversial laws, which enhance the use of facial recognition technology (FRT) to monitor and identify citizens, threaten to undermine democratic principles by deterring public participation and civil liberties. This is the core issue at hand in the unfolding debate over privacy and technology at a critical juncture for human rights in Europe.
The Hungarian Parliament hastily passed three amendments in March 2025 to tighten surveillance measures that target LGBTQAI+ demonstrations, with little public discourse. By April 15, these modifications allowed police to use FRT for all infractions, not just severe offenses. Previously, the technology could only be utilized in serious cases that warranted custodial sentences. Now, even minor acts, like attending a peaceful Pride event, fall under this expanded scrutiny. Activists and legal experts argue that this blatant expansion of FRT breaches not only the AI Act but also the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
The updated laws indicate a significant shift in Hungary’s law enforcement strategy. Biometric identification is now possible not just for grave incidents, but also for trivial infractions, raising alarms about the implications for individual privacy. Video footage recorded at public demonstrations can now be used by the police to identify attendees through facial recognition. This has raised pressing concerns among advocacy groups about the potential abuse of such a broad interpretation of surveillance.
Real-time biometric identification (RBI) is under strict regulations due to its highly invasive nature. The AI Act restricts its use in public spaces mainly for serious crimes or imminent threats. This regulation is vital as RBI can create an atmosphere of constant surveillance, intimidating individuals from expressing themselves in public settings, such as protests. Exceptions for RBI are narrowly defined under Article 5(1)(h) of the Act, which raises further questions about the legitimacy of Hungary’s broad application of FRT.
As Hungary’s legislative changes markedly expand biometric surveillance, they clash with established EU laws designed to protect individual rights. The implications are significant. Not only do these laws threaten personal freedoms, but they also challenge the EU’s commitment to democratic values. The European Commission must act swiftly to scrutinize this legislation, as it sets a precedent for how seriously the Union will uphold its own regulations governing artificial intelligence and human rights.
Original Source: edri.org
