Surveillance woes
- Source: Global Times
- [15:33 April 09 2011]
- Comments
A camera watches a Shifoying community in Chaoyang. Photo: Guo Yingguang/GT
By Wei Na
The 109 cameras installed in Chaoyang, Dongcheng, Xicheng and Haidian districts by the Beijing Traffic Management Bureau on Monday were but a small addition to the over 400,000 cameras monitoring public spaces in Beijing as of April last year, according to a Xinhua report.
However, while the bureau's website calls the cameras "a dependable and vital means of obtaining evidence of traffic offenses," individuals needing to access the cameras for evidence cannot always do so.
Last August, after a university student named Ma Yue fell on the tracks and died at the Gulou subway station, his mother's request to see the camera footage from the time of the accident was turned down with the claim that the cameras were broken.
A woman surnamed Zhang said Thursday that after fights in February between residents and a property developer occurred in the Xiaotangshan community where she lives, in Changping district, the video surveillance footage mysteriously disappeared only for the time period during which residents' windows and doors were smashed.
The municipal government's most recent regulations for public cameras were enacted on April 1, 2007, and stipulated that footage is not allowed to be damaged or changed within the time limit during which it is retained. Violations could incur fines from 10,000 to 30,000 yuan ($1,582 to 4,585).
However, no specified time limit to retain surveillance footage was given.
Wang Dapeng, a manager with the Zhongguancun branch of the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, told the Global Times that they would retain footage for three months, but that when clients ask to see footage without a certificate from the police or the courts, they are routinely told that "the cameras are broken," in order to avoid legal disputes.
Yu Lijiang, a judge with the Chaoyang district court, told the Global Times that because examining recorded images also involves other peoples' privacy, individuals cannot individually ask to see footage without the support of police or a court.
However, he said those who hold the footage are liable for it.
"If a unit like the subway company is the party involved, they are obligated to preserve the video images the moment that they learn that an accident has happened," Yu said, adding that in the event of a lawsuit, the complainant could still win if footage that was relevant to the case was found to be deliberately tampered with or deleted by the party responsible for preserving it.
