The European Commission’s recent proposal to digitize travel documents aims to streamline the travel process but raises significant concerns about privacy, data security, and the potential for discrimination. As part of its digital travel initiative, the Commission is advancing two major legislative proposals, one of which introduces a “digital travel app” for the pre-submission of travel data and digital credentials. This move, however, has drawn criticism from various human rights groups, including EDRi, who argue that it could pave the way for biometric surveillance and exacerbate existing inequalities.
Biometric Surveillance Risks
A core feature of the European Commission’s proposal is the use of biometric data, particularly facial recognition, to expedite travel document verification. However, critics argue that this system lacks sufficient safeguards, leaving travelers vulnerable to potential misuse of their biometric data. While the proposal emphasizes the convenience of digital travel credentials, it does not outline clear security protocols, raising concerns over how facial recognition databases would be managed and protected. This infrastructure could lead to the widespread use of biometric surveillance at border crossings, further expanding the reach of surveillance systems across the EU.
Commercial Interests and Security Concerns
Although presented as a tool to modernize passport and ID card processing, the proposal primarily focuses on the digital pre-submission of travelers’ data. This would allow border authorities to process information from the chips embedded in physical documents before arrival. Despite claims that the system would reduce border check times, it does not address the underlying issue of increasing securitization, which often treats individuals as security threats. Critics argue that the technology—especially biometric identification—may disproportionately impact certain racial groups, leading to a heightened risk of discrimination and biased treatment.
The promise of reducing border checks by a mere 20 seconds may primarily benefit airlines and border agencies rather than travelers themselves, raising questions about whether the proposal truly serves the public interest or merely commercial goals. As the push for tighter security measures intensifies across Europe, the proposal may inadvertently reinforce the notion that people must be surveilled and controlled for the sake of national security.
Discrimination and Coercion Concerns
While the proposal makes digital travel app usage voluntary, human rights groups warn that the system could have coercive effects, especially for those who are already marginalized by existing border control practices. In a system where the consequences of being perceived as “suspicious” are severe, travelers may feel pressured to use the app, even if they prefer to maintain their privacy or avoid biometric scans. This imbalance of power between travelers and border authorities could lead to harassment, detention, or denial of travel for those who choose not to participate in the digital system.
Moreover, there are concerns that traditional border checks could be de-prioritized, forcing individuals who prefer manual verification into increasingly cumbersome processes. The proposal also fails to address the challenges faced by third-country nationals whose data may not be compatible with the EU’s digital system, potentially leading to travel disruptions and unequal treatment.
A Call for Balanced Solutions
EDRi has called for a careful reevaluation of the proposal, particularly urging the European Commission to maintain traditional border lanes with manual checks and e-gates as viable options. These systems must be adequately resourced to ensure that individuals who choose not to use the digital travel credentials are not disadvantaged. Furthermore, the concerns raised over privacy, data protection, and potential discrimination need to be fully addressed before any digital system is implemented.
As the European Commission continues to refine its digital travel initiative, the balance between convenience, security, and fundamental rights remains a central point of contention. The feedback from stakeholders will be crucial in shaping a system that protects both travelers’ rights and the integrity of the border control process.
Related topics:
Foreign Tourist Arrivals to China Surge After Visa Relaxations Fuel Travel Searches