The right to know: Comparative analysis of notification requirements in public space surveillance systems

The proliferation of advanced surveillance technologies in public spaces presents unprecedented challenges to privacy rights and democratic governance. While authorities gain extensive visibility into citizens’ lives through artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) capabilities, a critical ‘transparency asymmetry’ has emerged between state surveillance capabilities and citizens’ awareness of such monitoring. This paper employs comparative legal analysis, examining constitutional provisions, legislation, administrative regulations and court decisions across multiple jurisdictions, with a primary focus on the European Union (EU) and the US. The study draws upon primary legal sources, academic literature, policy documents and technical standards to evaluate the effectiveness of various notification approaches. The analysis reveals three fundamental structural failures in existing notification systems: (1) a disconnect between formal notification and substantive understanding of surveillance implications, particularly in systems incorporating AI; (2) ‘consent fatigue’ that undermines notification effectiveness; and (3) fragmented standards creating significant accountability gaps in privacy protection. The EU has developed comprehensive notification requirements through the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) framework and court decisions, while the US maintains a more limited ‘notice-and-choice’ approach. This paper proposes a dynamic constitutional notice framework that reconceptualises notification requirements as dynamic constitutional obligations rather than static procedural rules. This framework bridges the European dignity-based and US property-centric approaches while providing flexible implementation mechanisms that can adapt to emerging technologies while preserving democratic oversight. This article is also included in The Business & Management Collection which can be accessed at https://hstalks.com/business/.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of data protection & privacy.
Published
2025-11-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.69554/ftwd3067
Primary Topic
Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The right to know: Comparative analysis of notification requirements in public space surveillance systems

Beatriz Muñoz, Eyal Sabro
Journal of data protection & privacy.
Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
article

The right to know: Comparative analysis of notification requirements in public space surveillance systems

Beatriz Muñoz, Eyal Sabro
article en

Abstract

The proliferation of advanced surveillance technologies in public spaces presents unprecedented challenges to privacy rights and democratic governance. While authorities gain extensive visibility into citizens’ lives through artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) capabilities, a critical ‘transparency asymmetry’ has emerged between state surveillance capabilities and citizens’ awareness of such monitoring. This paper employs comparative legal analysis, examining constitutional provisions, legislation, administrative regulations and court decisions across multiple jurisdictions, with a primary focus on the European Union (EU) and the US. The study draws upon primary legal sources, academic literature, policy documents and technical standards to evaluate the effectiveness of various notification approaches. The analysis reveals three fundamental structural failures in existing notification systems: (1) a disconnect between formal notification and substantive understanding of surveillance implications, particularly in systems incorporating AI; (2) ‘consent fatigue’ that undermines notification effectiveness; and (3) fragmented standards creating significant accountability gaps in privacy protection. The EU has developed comprehensive notification requirements through the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) framework and court decisions, while the US maintains a more limited ‘notice-and-choice’ approach. This paper proposes a dynamic constitutional notice framework that reconceptualises notification requirements as dynamic constitutional obligations rather than static procedural rules. This framework bridges the European dignity-based and US property-centric approaches while providing flexible implementation mechanisms that can adapt to emerging technologies while preserving democratic oversight. This article is also included in The Business & Management Collection which can be accessed at https://hstalks.com/business/.

Journal of data protection & privacy.Vol. 8(2)
Office of the Attorney General (US), Fundación Medina (ES)
Openalex Percentile: Top 56%
Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.