The European Court of Justice ruled having fingerprints on ID cards was legal under EU privacy laws. The benefits of having such a system were key to preventing identity theft, it said.
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) said the 2019 regulation was in line with fundamental rights to respect for private life and the protection of personal data.
A German court in the western city of Wiesbaden asked ECJ to review the validity of an EU regulation calling for two fingerprints to be stored on an individual’s identity card after a German challenged the city’s decision to deny him a new identity card if he did not provide his fingerprints.
The ECJ justified its decision saying fingerprints on IDs were important in the prevention of identity theft and the interoperability of verification systems.
The court ruled that the benefits of such a system made it compatible with the right to respect for private life and the protection of personal data.
The court additionally said that a facial image can be inefficient, as a face can change due to illness, aging, lifestyle, and surgery.
Some civil rights activists were disappointed with the court’s decision, arguing that other options could be explored to combat identity theft.
The original article contains 227 words, the summary contains 162 words. Saved 29%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) said the 2019 regulation was in line with fundamental rights to respect for private life and the protection of personal data.
A German court in the western city of Wiesbaden asked ECJ to review the validity of an EU regulation calling for two fingerprints to be stored on an individual’s identity card after a German challenged the city’s decision to deny him a new identity card if he did not provide his fingerprints.
The ECJ justified its decision saying fingerprints on IDs were important in the prevention of identity theft and the interoperability of verification systems.
The court ruled that the benefits of such a system made it compatible with the right to respect for private life and the protection of personal data.
The court additionally said that a facial image can be inefficient, as a face can change due to illness, aging, lifestyle, and surgery.
Some civil rights activists were disappointed with the court’s decision, arguing that other options could be explored to combat identity theft.
The original article contains 227 words, the summary contains 162 words. Saved 29%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!