CCtv Camera is nothing for security

Installation of cctv cameras in the sacred places has no benefits; It is wastage of money and breach of privacy.

In the ‘Quran, Allah Sub'hanu Ta’ala says, “Are those knowledgeable equal to those who are ignorant? (39:9)
Saidyedul Mursaleen , ‘Imamul Mursaleen, Huzur Pak Sallallahu ‘Aalaihi Wa Sallam stated, “When Allah Pak wishes good for someone, Allah Ta’aala bestows upon him the pure capabilities of understanding of Deen.” (Al-Bukhari Shareef, Muslim Shareef)

Knowledge and understanding of Deen (religion) here stand for the knowledge of the ‘Quran Shareef and Hadis Shareef, Ijma (religious injunctions), and Kias. This Hadis Shareef highlights the excellence of knowledge and it also indicate that someone, who acts upon the ‘Iilm that he possesses, is showered with the unlimited Rahmat of Allah Ta’aala”

What we found as Huque or true in shariat, we must convey it to the mass people so that they can follow it. Installation of cameras in the sacred places for monitoring purpose is not only Haraam (prohibited) in Shariah but also unjustified by any Muslim and an unacceptable matter to conscience.

The Hajjis are being watched and their images are recorded far higher in number than we generally can realize. More than 9000 security cameras were used for supervision in the sacred sites of Makkah on 2005 in the name of safety of Hajji during the season of Hajj.

The civil defense directorate of Saudi Arabia is planning to bring the whole movement of Hajji in the sacred areas that includes the Grand Mosque, Mina, Arafat and other sacred sites under CCTV surveillance to monitor activities. The surveillance system is already in place in the area surrounding the Jamarat Bridge, which had been the site of fatal overcrowding incidents in the past. The number of CCTV cameras at the jamarat is 1000. The objective of all the measures taken in the Jamarat and other areas are only to observe through cameras as a precautionary measure against any possible untoward incident. But the effectiveness of CCTV surveillance in preventing crime and anti-social behavior is still highly doubtful and strongly disputed.

Spending money just for monitoring purpose brings no benefits. It is nothing but wastage of money and breach of privacy. While cameras are working for monitoring purpose, the hajjis are being photographed 400 times per second by surveillance cameras. Why we should accept such illegal interference in our privacy and other personal affairs?

CCTV is often assumed to be a powerful deterrent, but the results of most research into the impact of CCTV on crime prevention remain ambiguous. For example, a landmark 2002 study for the UK Home Office which examined 22 evaluations of CCTV use in city centers/public housing, public transport, and car parking in the UK and North America, reported that eleven of the evaluations found a decrease in crime, five found an increase in crime, five found no effect at all, and one found that there was unclear evidence of an effect. The study also found that CCTV had no impact on violent crimes.

A study conducted for the Crime Prevention Division in Australia in 2001 noted that the academic research literature suggests CCTV does not work as a crime prevention tool. Furthermore, there are indications to a displacement effect in a way that a decrease in the incidence of crime in areas covered by CCTV is associated with an increase in crime in areas with no cameras. It is clear that the presence of CCTV cameras does not always prevent incidents. Surveillance cameras can not stop the bombings; rather, the bomb can blow out the CCTV camera itself.

Three recent criminological reports, according to the Privacy International website (www.privacyinternational.org), have discredited conventional wisdom about effectiveness. The director of The Scottish Centre for Criminology argues that claims of crime reduction are little more than fantasy. The British Journal of Criminology described the statistics from Strathclyde by the untrained and self-interested practitioner. The crime statistics rarely reflect the hypothesis that CCTV merely displaces criminal activity to areas outside the cameras.
“There is stronger evidence that street lighting stops crime better than CCTV.”

Australian Chief Minister, Jon Stanhope, was reported in July 2005 saying that he would prefer deployment of more police to installation of more surveillance cameras across the city.
As the Australian Institute of Criminology noted in 2004, CCTV systems can be expensive to install, maintain and operate. Cost depends on a number of factors, but monitoring has clearly been shown to be most expensive. A review of Fairfield’s CCTV system is reported to have revealed that the expense of employing staff to monitor the system accounted for 70 per cent of overall ongoing costs.

During the hajj of 2004, total amount spent by Saudi Arabia to improve Hajj facilities and administration is $14000000000. Sufficient money was spent just to install and operate CCTV during hajj.
There is very little legislation to protect what happens to CCTV footage. A legal precedent last year established that the Data Protection Act doesn’t apply to CCTV unless it is being targeted on a particular individual. A recent survey showed that 90 per cent of CCTV fails to comply with any data protection legislation.”

Private space is shrinking as governments develop the potential to encroach on it. This is done obviously from malevolent intention. Getting information is simply what governments like to do, for reasons of efficiency, security and expanding their knowledge of the communities whom they ostensibly serve. Most people consider this fair enough at the moment although if you have been subjected to the new scanning devices at Heathrow Terminal 4, which can effectively see through clothes to reveal the naked body underneath, you may feel the intrusion is becoming excessive.

Saudi authorities need to be very clear about their expectation from the CCTV surveillance and security system before jump for installation of the same.