← the record
AIAAIC-1610

French court rules City of Orleans use of AI is illegal

A French court ruled that the City of Orleans' use of AI-powered audio surveillance is disproportionate and illegal, raising doubts about the legality of other similar systems in the country. Intended to detect "unusual situations", the system c onsisted of microphones installed in public spaces linked to local CCTV cameras. The court rejected (pdf) the city's argument that no personal data was being processed, stating that the microphones linked to cameras collect information that could identify individuals. The court ruled that even if the system was useful for policing, it "cannot be considered necessary for the exercise of these powers," emphasising that usefulness does not equate to legality or proportionality. The ruling is considered the first victory in France against this kind of AI-powered audio surveillance. The court also ruled that public contracts for such surveillance systems can be challenged in court by organi s ations like La Quadrature du Net, which brought th e case. The decision is seen as a warning to other cities considering similar surveillance technologies, and highlights the need for greater transparency, public consultation, and adherence to fundamental rights when implementing surveillance systems. System 🤖 Sensivic Operator: Developer: Sensivic Country: France Sector: Govt - munic ipal Purpose: Detect abnormal situations Technology: Machine learning Issue: Accountability; Human/civil rights; Privacy; Surveillance Legal, regulatory 👩🏼‍⚖️ La Quadrature du Net v la commune d’Orléans (pdf)

Date it happened
2024-07-01
Organisation involved
City of Orleans
Product, system or model
Sensivic
Where this came from
Share this incident
XLinkedInFacebookWhatsAppEmail
Attribution

This incident was imported from AIAAIC and is used under CC BY-SA 4.0. Our additions to it — the structured fields, the translation, the checks against other reports — are published under the same licence.

This is a record of what was reported, not a finding that anyone broke the law. If it names your organisation and you believe it is wrong, the corrections process is free and open to everyone.