The Rise of Tech-Driven Policing: Balancing National Security and Human Rights

By Dr. Brandford  S. Adams 

Across the world, from Lagos to New Delhi, Beijing, Nairobi, and Manila, governments are rapidly integrating new technologies into national security frameworks. Artificial intelligence (AI), facial recognition, predictive analytics, drone surveillance, biometric databases, and digital communication monitoring now shape the landscape of public safety. This trend, often referred to as tech-driven policing, promises faster crime detection, improved national security, and enhanced decision-making.

Yet, it also raises difficult questions: How much surveillance is acceptable in a democracy? Who guards the guardians? Can national security be strengthened without compromising fundamental human rights?

1. Understanding Tech-Driven Policing in the Global South

Tech-driven policing refers to security operations supported by digital technologies such as:

1. AI-based facial recognition

2. Mobile phone geolocation tracking

3. DNA and biometric databases

4. Predictive policing algorithms

5. CCTV networks with real-time analytics

6. Unmanned aerial vehicles (drones)

Countries such as China, Singapore, India, Rwanda, South Africa, and the United Arab Emirates have heavily invested in these systems. Nigeria is also expanding its digital security architecture through the National Identity Number (NIN), SIM registration policies, biometric voter systems, and growing adoption of CCTV networks in major cities.

According to the United Nations Human Rights Office (OHCHR), these technologies offer opportunities for “improving safety and efficiency” but also introduce “unprecedented surveillance capabilities that can undermine privacy, freedom of movement, and freedom of expression” (OHCHR, 2021).

2. Why Governments Are Turning to Technology

The adoption of advanced security technologies is driven by several global and domestic pressures:

1. Rising insecurity and crime complexity
   Terrorism, cybercrime, kidnapping, human trafficking, and insurgency have become more sophisticated. AI-enabled tools help security agencies process large volumes of information faster.

2. Urbanization and population growth
   Nigeria, India, China, and other rapidly urbanizing nations face enormous pressure to maintain order in megacities.

3. International security cooperation
   Counterterrorism frameworks increasingly encourage intelligence-sharing and surveillance technologies, especially after 9/11.

4. Global technological diffusion
   Affordable surveillance technologies from Asia, particularly China, have made digital policing accessible for many developing countries.

3. Human Rights Concerns in the Age of Digital Security

While technology can enhance safety, it may also reshape the relationship between the state and its citizens. Several human rights concerns are frequently raised by international organizations, such as Human Rights Watch (2023) and Amnesty International (2022):

a. Privacy violations

AI-enabled CCTV and mass data collection allow governments to track everyday activities without citizens’ consent. This may violate the right to privacy guaranteed under international law, including Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

b. Algorithmic bias

Facial recognition systems have higher error rates for people with darker skin tones—an issue documented in MIT research (Buolamwini & Gebru, 2018). This raises risks of false arrests and discriminatory targeting.

c. Lack of transparency

Many countries lack data protection laws, independent oversight bodies, or clear policies on how security agencies use stored information.

d. Chilling effect on free expression

Widespread surveillance may discourage citizens from participating in protests, political activism, or critical speech. The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression (2021) warns that such environments can undermine democratic participation.

e. Data misuse and cybersecurity risks

Large biometric databases can be abused for political profiling or exposed during cyberattacks, putting millions at risk.

4. The Security vs. Rights Dilemma: Is Balance Possible?

Balancing national security and human rights is not merely a legal challenge but a governance test. Scholars argue that security and liberty are not mutually exclusive; instead, they require robust regulatory frameworks. According to the World Economic Forum (2023), societies must ensure that “security solutions are trustworthy, accountable, and aligned with democratic norms.” 

A balanced approach requires:

a. Clear legal frameworks

Countries such as India and South Korea have enacted data protection laws to regulate biometric and digital surveillance programs. Nigeria’s Data Protection Act (2023) is a step in the right direction, but enforcement remains critical.

b. Independent oversight

Human rights commissions, civil society groups, and parliamentary committees must monitor security agencies.

c. Impact Assessments for New Technologies

Before deployment, governments should conduct human rights impact assessments to examine the potential risks.

d. Transparency and Public Engagement

Citizens should know:

(i) What data is collected

(ii) How it is stored

(iii) Who can access it

(iv) How long is it retained

e. Algorithmic Accountability

AI systems used by law enforcement should be subjected to independent audits to detect bias, errors, or abuse.

5. The Nigerian and Asian Context: Opportunities and Risks

Nigeria’s insecurity challenges, banditry, Boko Haram insurgency, and urban crime make advanced surveillance attractive. However, concerns over unlawful arrests, excessive force, and weak institutional oversight mean technology could exacerbate existing problems if not properly regulated.

Asia presents both cautionary and inspiring examples.

1. China demonstrates the efficiency of large-scale surveillance but raises global privacy concerns.

2. Singapore shows how strong regulatory frameworks can integrate technology while maintaining public trust.

3. India illustrates the risks of using digital ID systems without adequate safeguards.

Nigeria can learn from these diverse models by adopting technology while reinforcing democratic accountability.

6. Ensuring that Technology Serves the People

Technology must remain a tool, not a master. Its purpose should be to enhance human dignity, protect life, and strengthen democracy. When used responsibly, tech-driven policing can:

(i) Improve criminal investigations

(ii) Reduce response time

(iii) Strengthen border security, enhance public confidence

But without clear rules, it can undermine the very freedoms it seeks to protect.

Conclusion

Tech-driven policing is rapidly shaping the security landscape of the 21st century. The challenge for nations, especially in Africa and Asia, is to ensure that innovation does not come at the cost of fundamental rights. A balanced approach, guided by transparency, accountability, and respect for human dignity, is not only possible but essential.

As the United Nations stresses, technological advancement must always be “human-centered, rights-respecting, and justice-oriented.” When these principles guide national security strategies, societies become not only safer but also freer.

References

Amnesty International. (2022). Nigeria: Digital surveillance and the shrinking civic space. Amnesty International.

Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 81, 1–15.

Human Rights Watch. (2023). Nigeria: Ongoing concerns over surveillance, policing, and human rights. Human Rights Watch.

Nigeria Data Protection Act. (2023). An Act to provide a legal framework for the protection of personal data and privacy in Nigeria. Abuja: Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). (2021). The right to privacy in the digital age: Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (A/HRC/48/31). Geneva: United Nations.

UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression. (2021). Report on freedom of expression and the use of surveillance technologies (A/76/258). New York: United Nations.

World Economic Forum. (2023). Global Risks Report 2023. Geneva: World Economic Forum.