Written by 
tl;dr
There has been a growing trend of deploying CCTV or AI enabled CCTV cameras during exams by various exam conducting bodies, including the National Testing Agency (“NTA”), state boards, and prestigious bodies like the Union Public Services Commission (“UPSC”) and State Services Commissions. This move raises significant concerns for students, invigilators, and other individuals physically present in the examination hall under surveillance—e-surveillance of students without adequate safeguards and legal basis is an unreasonable invasion of their privacy, and can have exacerbated psychosocial effects in an stressful environment like exam halls . We wrote to the Minister of Education, Chairpersons of UPSC and NTA, and the Director of the Karnataka State Education Board to take necessary steps to preserve the privacy of all implicated parties, and recall this action with immediate effect.
Important documents:
- IFF’s Letter to NTA on CCTV surveillance during exams dated September 10, 2024. (Link)
- IFF’s Letter to UPSC regarding CCTV surveillance during exams dated September 10, 2024. (Link)
- IFF’s Letter to the Ministry of Education regarding CCTV surveillance during exams dated September 10, 2024. (Link)
- IFF’s Letter to Karnataka Board on CCTV surveillance during exams dated September 10, 2024. (Link)
Background
In recent years, numerous exam conducting bodies have adopted the use of AI-enabled CCTV cameras to monitor students during examinations. This year, CCTV surveillance was implemented across a variety of high-stakes assessments, including the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (NEET), the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE), state board exams, and various state-level public service commission tests. Recently, UPSC has also decided to deploy CCTV cameras during the exams to curb the unfair practices. (See here, here, here, here and here).
We believe that this extensive deployment of CCTV cameras constitutes a direct violation of the fundamental right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. While the goal of these surveillance measures is to deter unfair practices and enhance the integrity of exams, evidence suggests that CCTV surveillance falls short of these objectives. Not only has it proven ineffective in curbing cheating, but it has also adversely affected students’ performance, creating an atmosphere of heightened stress and anxiety.
In response to these concerns, we wrote to key exam conducting bodies—NTA (read the letter here), UPSC (here), Karnataka School Examination and Assessment Board (“KSEAB”) (here), and the Ministry of Education (here). Our correspondence outlined the detrimental effects of CCTV surveillance in exam settings, questioned its effectiveness in preventing misconduct, and highlighted the intrusive nature of constant monitoring and violation of the fundamental right to privacy. We supported our arguments with various studies and real-world examples, which are discussed below.
CCTV surveillance is not the answer
False equivalence between crime prevention and CCTV use
CCTV cameras are often perceived as a foolproof solution for preventing crime or misconduct, but multiple studies have proven that CCTV surveillance has little to no effect on reduction of crime in the surveilled area.(see here, here and here). The assumption that cameras lead to improved behavior is not supported by evidence.
On their specific use case on students, CCTVs prove counter-intuitive as well. Following the 2007 shooting at Virginia Tech College in the United States, a study examining the sense of security of college students in the country indicated that camera installation increased anxiety and imposed a negative impact on school climate, and even facilitated a false sense of security rather than safety.
May fracture trust and overburden staff
A 2022 study on the implications of CCTV cameras on child-care centres’ routines and peer relationships revealed that, on the one hand, high expectations that CCTV cameras will prevent violence in child care centres are not realistic, and on the other, the consequences of installing cameras may impair the delicate relationships between parents and staff, and interfere with centres’ routines. The often strenuous relationship between exam invigilators and students or their parents may be further strained when placed under constant surveillance.
This intrusive monitoring system also places an additional burden on teachers and invigilators. They are not only required to remain extra vigilant during exams but also to rely on recorded footage to assess any potential misconduct flagged by the software. This added responsibility may lead to teachers becoming hesitant to supervise exams under CCTV surveillance in the future. A study conducted in Israel indicates that the installation of CCTV cameras in schools has demoralized educators, who resist such monitoring. Furthermore, the fear of being wrongly flagged is a concern for both students and teachers. If AI-enabled cameras mistakenly identify an activity as cheating or misconduct that the invigilator did not perceive as such, it could unfairly call into question the teacher’s competence and performance.
May lead to increased anxiety and negatively impact performance
Evidence suggests that e-surveillance, especially in examination context, can significantly increase anxiety among students. CCTV cameras have been proved to instil anxiety and fear among students for being continuously monitored and their actions being wrongly flagged as misconduct, which in turn, can impact their overall performance during the exam.
A 2020 report by technology journalist Drew Harwell highlighted that online proctoring and constant monitoring lead to extreme stress, with students experiencing anxiety, frustration, and fear. Interviewees reported being wrongly flagged for cheating, which led to emotional distress and even physical symptoms like crying or urinating at their desks. Concerns about the long-term impact of false accusations on their academic and professional futures only added to their anxiety which may haunt them for life.
The plan directly violates privacy standards
Our resistance to this initiative is not limited to the efficacy (or lack thereof) of CCTV cameras in curtailing cheating or misconduct. Grave concerns around individual privacy also come to the force. By capturing and storing facial data, AI enabled CCTVs can prove to be highly intrusive, facilitate real-time surveillance and go against the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India. Broadly, the standard of “reasonable expectation of privacy” discussed in the decision is not exclusionary and links to autonomy, liberty and dignity of individuals, which are components of fundamental rights. As JJ. Chandrachud noted,
“While the legitimate expectation of privacy may vary from intimate zone to the private zone and from the private to the public arena, it is important to underscore that privacy is not lost or surrendered merely because the individual is in a public place.”
JJ. Bobde added,
“The entitlement to such a condition is not confined only to intimate spaces such as the bedroom or the washroom but goes with a person wherever he is, even in a public place.”
Most of the individuals subjected to such invasive surveillance may be minor students. Data of minors requires additional insulation from privacy breaches and misuse – in Puttaswamy, the Supreme Court underscores that there has to be added burden while handling and processing children’s data. The scheme of CCTV surveillance during exams has been implemented in the absence of any underlying legal framework for data protection or publicly available Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to regulate it. Unregulated use of CCTVs can result in gross misuse.
It is also unclear if any privacy protections have been put in place to ensure against misuse of the CCTV footage by the executing agencies. Additionally, information concerning the custodian or proprietor of students’ footage/data, accessibility to such footage, and the duration of its storage remains undisclosed to the public. It remains ambiguous whether the responsibility of storing the data lies with the exam conducting bodies, the companies deploying the CCTV cameras, or the invigilators/teachers, which complicates determining accountability in instances of data breaches.
Demonstratedly, AI enabled CCTV surveillance of students impedes the exercise of one’s right to privacy, and jeopardises vulnerable data.
No protections in law
In 2021, the Ministry of Education introduced its Guidelines on School Safety and Security, following the National Education Policy, 2020. Clause 5.6(g)(x) specifies that CCTV cameras may be installed at entry and exit points and other vulnerable areas in schools, but only “to the extent and only if and wherever possible.” However, the use of CCTV cameras in schools raises serious privacy concerns. For instance, in the case of Indian Hotel and Restaurant Association v. State of Maharashtra, the court ruled that installing cameras in performance rooms was an excessive invasion of privacy, calling it a “totally inappropriate” measure. This decision was influenced by Anita Allen’s notion of “unpopular” privacy, which suggests that privacy laws must protect individuals’ rights even if they are not universally embraced. Given these legal and ethical considerations, implementing AI-enabled CCTV cameras during exams can be seen as an undue and unlawful intrusion into personal privacy.
In response to the Delhi government’s plan to install CCTV cameras in classrooms, a seasoned educator with over 40 years of experience expressed concern that constant monitoring could turn teachers into “nervous wrecks,” adding undue stress to their roles. This AI-enabled surveillance would also increase the administrative workload for schools and exam centers, as teachers might need to manage or maintain the cameras. Given the already challenging working conditions for teachers in India, they may resist this additional responsibility. Experts also warn that relying on CCTV cameras might create a false sense of security about preventing cheating, potentially redirecting funds and resources away from more effective measures, such as student counseling and preparing support materials for exams.
In India, in absence of any specific regulation, the use of CCTV cameras can broadly be brought under the purview of the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011 and the Information Technology Act, 2000. According to these legislations, organisations are required to inform individuals about the collection, storage, and usage of their personal information, and obtain their consent for the same. However, in this case, none of the documents publicly available refer to obtaining consent from the students and teachers for monitoring them via AI enabled CCTV cameras during the exams and collecting their data.
Our requests
We must pause to consider the repercussions of AI-enabled surveillance on the overall performance, safety and fundamental right to Privacy of students and exam candidates, some of whom may be children. Security issues emerge concerning the storage and handling of data recorded by CCTV cameras, rendering it prone to unauthorised access and possible exploitation by hackers. The potential for misuse of recorded footage poses a substantial risk, with implications ranging from deception to data theft. These factors accentuate the increased susceptibility of students’ data, underscoring the necessity for exam bodies to refrain from employing AI-based CCTV surveillance on students.
It is clear that this action of exam conducting bodies will cause more harm than good. We urged the authorities to recall this action with immediate effect.