From a policing standpoint, is it a disaster that those cameras can no longer be used and license plates can't be automatically recognized?

"Disaster" might be a bit exaggerated and emotional, but it's definitely a very serious issue. We see every day that those cameras are needed — they would cut our response time and give us better clarity. In extreme cases, they could help save lives, all while using resources more efficiently and in a targeted way, if we were able to deploy and continue using license plate recognition cameras. It's a significant and ongoing problem for us.

When you leave this interview and head back to the police station — without disclosing specific data — what kinds of cases are on your desk where a camera or camera footage is urgently needed, but you simply can't use it?

The range is quite broad, but I want to emphasize that these cameras were used primarily in the most serious cases. A good example comes from just yesterday in Pärnu County: we received a report that someone had been stuffed into the trunk of a car, wrapped in a rug and driven off in an unknown direction. The only information we had was a vague description of the car — no details about its appearance, no license plate number and no clear direction of travel.

Of course, the police throw everything they have at such cases to find out what happened and how serious the situation is. In this instance, license plate recognition cameras would have been a huge help — at the very least, we could've identified the direction the vehicle was headed and sent patrols to check things out.

But that option wasn't available to us. Instead, we had to go with much more resource-intensive alternatives — launching a criminal investigation, involving the Prosecutor's Office, making official data requests and relying on responses from a business, since the case involved a lodging facility.

The case ended well — it turned out the family simply didn't have enough space in the car, so they put the child in the trunk. But getting to that point took several hours. Patrol officers and investigators were all tied up with it and we were missing a very important tool.

How did the family explain putting the child in the trunk — just because there wasn't space in the car?

To the person who witnessed it, the situation seemed a bit more dangerous than it actually was.

Still, putting a person in the trunk is quite dangerous.

It is dangerous and clearly a hazardous situation in traffic. But again — it wasn't as bad as initially feared where it seemed like it could have involved unlawful detention or something even worse. We get reports like this every day and it's absolutely crucial that we're able to make contact with the person involved as quickly as possible and determine their direction of travel. License plate recognition cameras were a key tool in that.

But there are other examples too. For instance, international criminals who came to Estonia to distribute one kilogram of alpha-PVP, a highly potent drug. It was a stroke of luck that our Latvian colleagues, who were tailing them, managed to connect with officials from the Tax and Customs Board at the border. They were able to relay information within Estonia, and thanks to that lucky break, we were able to catch the criminals and seize a significant quantity of narcotics. Again — if that exchange of information hadn't come together by chance, license plate recognition cameras would have been a huge help.

But at the same time, everything you've just described also proves that it's possible to manage without license plate recognition cameras, doesn't it?

But again, it comes down to resources. We recently saw reports that there aren't enough investigators and that they're overloaded. All those alternative methods take significantly more time — we lose both time and manpower, which could otherwise be used for handling other cases. When license plate recognition cameras are off the table, everything becomes much more difficult.

In that Pärnu County case with the person in the trunk, were there license plate recognition cameras along the route the car took — public cameras that the police have access to?

I can't say for sure which route they took, because once we made contact with the person and confirmed everything was okay, it turned out to be a minor infraction compared to what we had initially suspected. At that point, the travel route no longer mattered.

But there are cases where we know, for example, that a driver who caused a traffic accident and potentially inflicted serious injuries fled the scene. We're aware that license plate recognition cameras were along the route, but we can't use them. So we turn to other public space cameras and managed to track the person or vehicle for a while — but ultimately couldn't identify them. In one case that happened in Tallinn a few weeks ago, it turned out the car had been sold multiple times and there was no corresponding note in the vehicle registry. As of now, the injured person is thankfully recovering at home, but the vehicle hasn't been found and the individuals involved remain unidentified. In that case, it's likely we're dealing with serious traffic offenders. These are the kinds of cases that end up unresolved.

What do you say to those who have been critical of the use of license plate recognition cameras and argue that their very existence is a serious violation of privacy? After all, the original permit only covered a very small number of cameras, but now the network has expanded — almost everywhere, to exaggerate just slightly. In today's world, where data is so important, personal information is considered a person's valuable property and privacy is a major concern.

It's a completely understandable concern and I believe regulatory clarity is in everyone's best interest. But we're constantly trying to strike a balance between privacy and public safety. I think in Estonia we've achieved a very strong sense of security and license plate recognition cameras are one of the tools that have contributed to that. They're not the only factor or the most decisive one, but they're part of a system that's clearly working. Taking away those tools ties our hands behind our backs — we can't fight crime effectively with one hand.

Of course, the regulations need to be in order. But if you look at the results from our internal oversight, there's no evidence of misuse. The data was retained for a short time — on average, about a month and a half. From a police perspective, I'd say there was a solid balance between any infringement on privacy and the concrete benefits these cameras provided.

But that same internal police review only covered a relatively short period, didn't it? The data in question only spanned about a month, if I'm not mistaken.

From what I understand, the review was actually thorough and looked at a broader timeframe. I know that colleagues provided clear explanations for why and on what grounds the cameras were used and the findings confirmed that they were only employed in more serious and justified cases.

One more response to the critics — some say the police's ultimate dream would be to have cameras everywhere, including facial recognition, because that would make it even easier to catch criminals. If there's no vehicle involved but a suspect is acting on foot and their face is caught on camera, then later on another city camera picks them up and they can be neatly apprehended.

I believe the police place a very high value on people's privacy and only intervene when absolutely necessary and strictly on legal grounds or with a clear basis for doing so. I don't think Estonia is anywhere near the forefront when it comes to surveillance systems. In fact, when we talk with foreign colleagues, it's clear that many of them have much broader capabilities. They use technology that's considered completely standard nowadays and apply it far more extensively to ensure public safety.

So you're not aiming for a system like in China, where a person's social credit score could be based on how well they've crossed the street?

No, definitely not. What we want is simply to be able to resolve serious, high-priority cases quickly — to save lives, protect people's health, catch criminals and do it the right way. People should know exactly what tools the police are using and no one should have to worry that their data is being mishandled or misused. That's not how the police operate.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook, Bluesky and X and never miss an update!