Categories: Insights, Practice

Tag: EDPB, GDPR, Linee Guida, videosorveglianza


2 Dec 2019

EDPB: Preliminary version of Guidelines 3/2019 on video surveillance

On 6 September 2019, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB“) completed its public consultation on the document containing the draft of the forthcoming Guidelines 3/2019 concerning video surveillance (“Guidelines 3/2019 on processing of personal data through video devices“).

The images and audio tracks that are processed through the use of video surveillance systems, fall under the definition of “personal data” as they enable individuals to be identified, be it directly or indirectly. The processing of such information must therefore fully comply with EU Regulation 2016/679 – GDPR – on the protection of personal data and (in accordance with Italian law) and Legislative Decree 196/2003 as amended by Legislative Decree 101/2018 containing the rules for adapting national legislation to the said Regulation.

The aim that the European Committee intends to achieve with the issuance of these new Guidelines, is to ensure a uniform application of the legislation on video surveillance within all Member States of the European Union.

In view of the foregoing, it must first be made clear that the clarifications given in the draft concerning the legal basis on which the installation of the system is based are of fundamental importance.
In principle, it is possible that all the conditions for lawfulness set forth in Article 6, paragraph  1), of the GDPR are met, even if those most applied in practice are the legitimate interest that the Data Controller needs to pursue (Article. 6, paragraph 1), section f), GDPR) or the performance of a task in the public interest (Article 6, paragraph 1), section e), GDPR).

The European Committee clarifies that the Data Controller must specify in detail both the legal basis on which the data processing carried out is based and the detail of the purposes pursued. A system based on “security” in its simplest and most general sense is no longer a sufficiently detailed purpose.

Another important clarification concerns filming based on legitimate interest. Data processing is considered lawful only if this legal basis remains real, current and demonstrable at all times.

The Italian Data Protection Authority has, on several occasions, recommended that Data Controllers use the video surveillance tool in a proportionate and non-excessive manner and this approach can be found in the draft of the forthcoming Guidelines. Before proceeding with the installation of such systems, in fact, the Data Controller must use other tools (such as, for example, support by appropriate security staff, the provision of remote-controlled gates or adequate lighting) and demonstrate the effective need for the adoption of a video surveillance system. This, paying particular attention to limiting and defining, both temporally and geographically, filming in order to constantly respect the principle of minimisation of personal data pursuant to Article 5, point 1, section c) of the GDPR.

Each Data Controller is required to balance the interests involved by analysing, on a case-by-case basis, the legitimate interests of the Data Controller, on the one hand, and the fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subjects on the other.

In view of the above, the EDPB is awaiting the publication of the final text of the Guidelines, which are not only the first document to apply the principles of the GDPR to data processing carried out by video filming, but also, by national law, the first new document on the subject after the “Provision on video surveillance” issued by the Italian Data Protection Authority on 8 April 2010.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Contact

Need information? Write to us and our team of experts will respond as soon as possible.

Fill in the form

More news and insights

1 Oct 2026

Corporate e-mail and defensive monitoring: when the GDPR and employment law lead to different outcomes 

The Piaggio case clearly illustrates how the same set of facts can give rise to profoundly different assessments depending on the perspective adopted. In its decision of 13…

1 Oct 2026

NASpI and Reinstatement: the Employee’s Election Causes Loss of the Benefit 

Headnote   In its recent judgment No. 24981 of 3 September 2026, the Italian Supreme Court held that, where a dismissal is set aside with an order of reinstatement…

1 Oct 2026

Did you know that… testimony given in court may have disciplinary relevance and, in the most serious cases, justify dismissal? 

The Italian Supreme Court, Labour Section, by order no. 25687 of 22 September 2026, addressed the issue of the disciplinary relevance of statements made by an employee in…

29 Sep 2026

Shadow AI in the workplace: how to govern risks, data, and security (Agenda digitale, 29 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Martina De Angeli)

The spread of artificial intelligence tools used without corporate authorization exposes businesses to risks involving personal data, confidential information, know-how, and cybersecurity. To govern Shadow AI, organizations need…

24 Sep 2026

The concept of “territorial scope” in a non-compete agreement (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 24 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Alessandro Ferrari)

Interpretative issues in light of the most recent case law on the nullity of non-compete agreements due to the indeterminacy of territorial scope By an order issued on…

16 Sep 2026

Did you know that… repeated violations of company procedures may justify the dismissal of a store manager?

The Italian Supreme Court (Labour Section), in Order No. 25231 of 11 September 2026, upheld the lawfulness of the dismissal for just cause of a store manager who…