The Armenian government is proceeding cautiously on a security bill that would build up surveillance infrastructure in the capital Yerevan, allowing more time for public discussion of the pros and cons of giving authorities expanded powers to potentially track individuals’ movements.

Introduced in the spring, and already approved by parliament in a preliminary reading, the Interior Ministry-drafted bill would grant law enforcement agencies 24/7 access to live feeds and recordings from video cameras installed across the city, providing expansive coverage of all public space in the center of Yerevan. Private businesses, educational institutions, and other entities would be required to install cameras covering all building entrances and surrounding areas, with footage retained for 15 days. 

Armenia’s deputy interior minister also hinted at plans to use artificial intelligence to analyze footage, something that many privacy experts fear could facilitate the use of biometric and facial recognition technologies in video surveillance. The potential use of widespread surveillance has political ramifications, as opponents of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan have mounted protests against his government in recent months. The bill’s provisions, if enacted, could potentially be used to identify opposition supporters for politically motivated retribution.

Officials cast the bill as an anti-crime measure designed to strengthen “public security.” But it has sparked spirited public debate over privacy concerns and potential rights abuses. Human Rights Watch has urged officials to reconsider their approach, and, at the very least, create guardrails that “mitigate any human rights risks,” as well as create comprehensive “plans for oversight and accountability.” 

“Widespread, indiscriminate video surveillance would inevitably lead to unjustified intrusions on privacy,” a HRW statement quoted Giorgi Gogia, the organization’s associate director for Europe and Central Asia, as saying. “Mass surveillance in public spaces would have a chilling effect on fundamental civil and political rights.”  

Armenian law enforcement authorities have faced increasing public pressure to reduce crime rates, particularly amid a spike in drug trafficking. Proponents of the bill argue that enhanced surveillance could serve as a deterrent and facilitate the more efficient solving of crimes.  But the country’s Data Protection Agency has echoed HRW’s concerns, issuing a statement that, in its current form, the bill would cause “disproportionate interference” with citizens’ privacy rights by enabling “unlimited and continuous processing of personal data” by authorities. 

Information Security expert Artur Papyan warned  that a rapid expansion in the numbers of CCTV cameras could potentially increase the risks of them being hacked and used for malicious surveillance purposes by third parties. He cited the example of Russian hackers breaking into the database of security cameras in Kyiv prior to an attack earlier this year.  

The government, which is striving to steer the country away from Russia and enhance ties with the West, is taking heed of the criticism. Final parliamentary consideration of the bill, originally scheduled for September, has been postponed. Parliament is now expected to consider adoption before the end of the year.

The Armenian government’s cautious approach on the surveillance bill contrasts with the behavior of the Georgian Dream leadership in neighboring Georgia, where the ruling party rammed restrictive legislation, known as the “foreign agents” law, through parliament without public input or legislative debate, sparking mass protests. Unlike Armenia which is aligning itself closer to the West, Georgian Dream has moved in recent years away from the European Union and United States and closer to Russia.

Armenian leaders have voiced interest in seeking EU membership. The country’s legal obligations as a signatory to various international treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the European Convention on Human Rights, require it to uphold strict privacy protection standards, yet some of the country’s existing laws, as well as pending bills, fall short of meeting EU benchmarks. For example, Armenia’s Electoral Commission has made public the database of all eligible voters in Armenia, including personal information about individuals and the people registered with them at the same address.

In 2020, the current government sought to pass a law that would make it easier for the police to access residents’ bank details without a court order, as required by current legislation. The bill, which the government tried to present as a means of combating money laundering, was declared unconstitutional by the country’s Constitutional Court.