It's an extension of the Schengen Information System (SIS)[1], which every country, which is a member of the Schengen accord, maintains.
I am not going to give the EU biometrical data, even if that means skipping some "services".
That may mean that you're not travelling into the EU at all. What is so different towards having to supply my fingerprints, when travelling to the US (or Malaysia, or Japan for that matter)?
Quote:
"The type of data about people kept in SIS includes (...)"
So it is not a complete list, and the listed entries are just an excerpt:
- requests for extradition
- undesirability of presence in particular territory
- minor age
- mental illnesses (!!!)
- missing person status
- a need for protection
- requests by a judicial authority
- and suspected of crime.
The SIS also keeps data referring to lost, stolen and misappropriated
I find the entry re mental illnesses very peculiar. I am curious how the total data structure looks like.
Not sure how it is in the US, but it seems that there is a right of access for each EU citizien to the SIS database[1], e.g. in Germany, citizens have a direct right of access by contacting
I have ADHD and it is flagged in the system. How do I know? When I tried to exchange my driver license, it was flagged and the “local DMV” forwarded the application to the police department. I then had to present evidence to the police I was capable of driving, thankfully I’ve never been fined and my psychiatrist didn’t have a problem signing a document stating I am capable of driving (even though he himself never measured that skill specifically). At the end of one year long back and forth with the police dept, I got a 2 year provisional DL. Not sure if they will ever grant me a regular DL though.
Thank you for sharing. That makes sense from a regulatory point of view - on the other hand, it is deeply concerning from the point of view of society (especially when it comes to other diseases that may have an influence on driving ability e.g. phychosis).
As always, there is a trade-off in technology application.
It isn't used entirely for bad purposes. I know that the most frequent use of medical info in the SIS is that police officers who arrested someone can check if they need a doctor to administer or prescribe medication or if they need to keep something in mind when handling the person. (ie is this person aggressive because of a mental illness or due to being an ass? do they require heart medication, etc.)
This is one of those issues that always stands out to me when people discuss "mental illness" and the government. Usually its in the context of firearms, but clearly thats not always the case. It makes it difficult to trust any system of flagging "mental illness" won't be full of false positives, and limit the liberty of perfectly healthy people. Regardless, thank you for sharing.
Good luck with that! For instance "New EU regulations for transaction authentication which go into effect next year are expected by Mastercard to significantly increase the use of biometrics for purchases". You can be sure that eventually no one will have a choice if they want to lead any kind of normal life. Obligatory capturing of biometric data at many airports is just getting going.
For the ex-USSR - the Soviet Republic, this vision of the future would have been a dream come true.
It is still possible to hold an EU passport which does not contain any biometric data, even though it's getting harder and harder and I suspect the still available loopholes will be eliminated pretty soon.
For example I live in an Eastern-European country that is also an EU member and I hold a passport which does not have any incorporated biometric data in it, but that only happens because I specifically chose a temporary (meaning one-year) passport instead of the normal 5-year or 10-year passports, the latter requiring you giving your biometric info away. As I was saying, I suspect this loophole will be closed pretty soon.
...you do realize that "biometric info" is the most easily accessible / stealable type of information. Anyone can grab your biometric infos easily if you become a person of interest, so it's hard to think of what you're practically gaining.
It's like Americans with their SSNs, this kind of information is practically public (ignoring legalese and crap), so trying to keep it away from a big database will only work up to a point. In a way things like the Equifax hack are a good thing because now anyone's SSN can be assumed public.
Sure, if you fancy a career in intelligence or as an undercover something, it would be a valuable personal asset to have "biometrics not recorded in databases X, Y and Z". But it only works until you're caught/recorded the first time. And if you're either "interesting enough" or a public person, anyone caring to track you surely already has your biometric infos.
(Otoh, assuming anyone managing that big EU db will be grossly incompetent is probably realistic :P)
> Sure, if you fancy a career in intelligence or as an undercover something
Well, if you plan a career undercover, you will want you biometrics recorded everywhere linked to alternative identities. The lack of biometric record is going raise more flags than Generic Joe passing through. This move of centralising biometric database is going to seriously reduce your number of available alternative personas.
No having your biometric stored is a loudable goal and should be seen as a form of protest. Like people living off the grid.
Unfortunately, as noble parent intention are, they are aligned with the much more pragmatic intentions of criminals, which means that, indeed, it will be harder and harder to achieve it and even when he succeed, he will make his profile light up like a Christmas tree in all the system when he tries to lead a normal life.
Wow, besides the possible expense, having a one year passport must be a pain. It's essentially valid for 6 months less the time of your trip since most places require six months validity beyond your departure from their jurisdiction. It's like you almost have to apply for a new passport for each trip! Also having a one year total duration is sure to attract attention from foreign authorities, they'll assume you're restricted for some reason. Telling them that you got it to avoid being fingerprinted is not going to please them.
If you want true misery, try getting flagged by the UK, EU or US and enjoy up getting detained for hours (in a holding cell) each time you try to cross their border.
Yeah, I've travelled to Turkey pretty soon after I had it issued, in fact that was the main reason of me getting a passport and yes, I did sort of use it as a one-time thingie. It sure adds some extra costs (in real money and in opportunity costs) but I'm willing to eat them up, for the moment.
> is sure to attract attention from foreign authorities, they'll assume you're restricted for some reason. Telling them that you got it to avoid being fingerprinted is not going to please them.
That's one extra reason not to travel to countries that treat tourists/foreign people like crap.
I have, it was no issue. Also, you can get it within the hour. But it is expensive and you will get some weird looks. I haven't tried going the US with it.
Even if the US does accept the passport without a problem, it will still fingerprint and photograph almost every visitor whether or not the passport contains those biometrics. Canadian short-term visitors, and of course US citizens/nationals, are the main exception.
In 2020 the EES system comes into full effect this would require all Schengen entry documents including the 90 and 180 day visas to be backed by biometrics.
No, I am not. The US implementing "security" is a embarrassing failure in my opinion. They even created a whole new pointless agency. Probably didn't have enough already...
My national ID is valid for 10 years from now and does not use any biometrics. It was optional, but if I had chosen to add biometric information, it would just be on a relatively insecure device but not in any database. That is a huge difference. Not that I would accept either. So the problem is postponed at least.
It will be inconvenient, but managable. Even if credit card usage will be more difficult, but there are alternatives.
I fully acknowledge to be the weird dude paying the car in cash.
Edit: I would also guess it is incompatible with recently introduced legislation.