Dear Editor,

I WISH to respond to the statement made by Giftland Mall regarding the use of surveillance cameras which capture footage beyond their premises. Please note that I’m not a lawyer, but a private citizen who seeks clarification on the matter.

Firstly, I do believe that universally, there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Private companies should have a policy in place regarding the storage, retention and discarding of data that is being retrieved from their data systems. It is uncertain whether Giftland uses only video, audio or a combination of both.

Secondly, is Giftland using general security cameras to protect their property, or is Giftland using hi-tech camera technology to zoom in on other properties, such as the Arthur Chung Convention Center? Using zoom-in technology to invade the property of others could be one of the reasons why the police were advised to speak to Giftland about the matter.

In conclusion, everyone has the right to protect their property, using surveillance cameras, but to the extent that it doesn’t infringe on the personal and property rights of others. I believe that the police were correct in stating that placing surveillance cameras on other properties could be an offence.

Regards,
Riaz Hamid