Atlas of surveillance in Serbia: Where face, voice, license plate, and behavior recognition systems are used

The case raised a broader question: where else in Serbia is equipment being used that records not only video but also sound?

Cameras that recognize your face as you walk through a school gate. A microphone on a bus recording conversations. A system capable of linking a license plate to a vehicle’s route across multiple cities.

Over the past five years, hundreds of public institutions in Serbia have purchased more than a thousand pieces of surveillance equipment – from cameras with facial recognition, license plate tracking, and behavior analysis functions, to devices that record and analyze sound, as well as drones equipped with high-powered zoom and thermal imaging.

The data are detailed overview of where cameras that recognize faces and license plates are being used in Serbia, where sound is recorded, who owns behavior analysis software, and how the network of devices capable of tracking people and vehicles continues to expand.

The actual number of surveillance devices purchased is significantly higher, since the Ministry of Interior, the Serbian Armed Forces, the Military Security Agency (VBA), the Military Intelligence Agency (VOA), and the Security Intelligence Agency (BIA) acquire such equipment under special procurement procedures.

These types of equipment have legitimate security purposes but carry a risk of abuse, especially when it comes to citizens’ privacy.

Technology has developed rapidly as large parts of life have moved online, but the law has not kept pace. Very often, regulation responds only after problems have already escalated.

This kind of surveillance does not affect only employees within institutions, but also citizens who visit those buildings or simply pass by. In cities that install cameras in public spaces, surveillance extends to a broad circle of people and raises questions about the balance between security and privacy.

The key issues are not only technical, how long recordings are stored, who can access them, and for what purpose, but also ethical. These systems can undermine privacy, freedom of movement, and the right to assembly, particularly for vulnerable groups.

David Lyon of Queen’s University notes that such practices expand what he calls social sorting, categorizing populations in ways that allow different treatment based on recorded data. This often happens without public awareness, and even when people are aware, further action is rare.

This investigation follows earlier reporting of illegal digital surveillance of activists and journalists, including phone unlocking with forensic tools from Cellebrite and the installation of domestic spyware NoviSpy, as well as the Israeli program Pegasus.

At the same time, Serbia lacks a specific law regulating biometric surveillance, and previous attempts to introduce a legal framework for mass facial recognition were withdrawn after public pressure.

In that environment, the continued purchase of advanced video analytics, facial recognition systems, and other digital surveillance tools takes on broader significance, as it unfolds without clear and independent oversight mechanisms.

One case that sparked public attention involved audio surveillance in buses operated by GSP Beograd on two lines in Belgrade since May last year. Media reports prompted the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection to initiate an inspection, and the Secretariat for Public Transport ordered the removal of buses displaying stickers indicating audio surveillance.

The case raised a broader question: where else in Serbia is equipment being used that records not only video but also sound? Almost all cameras installed in GSP Belgrade buses, as well as those in JGSP Novi Sad, have built-in microphones. The most recent procurement of video surveillance for city buses in Niš, dating from 2017, also included the possibility of audio recording in 16 vehicles.

The NGO Partneri Srbija warns that microphones fundamentally change the nature of surveillance. Unlike traditional video monitoring, audio components capture the content of speech and communication, increasing the risk of excessive data processing and secondary use of recordings, especially in sensitive environments such as schools and hospitals. Serbia has no specific law regulating audio-video surveillance in public institutions outside the police system.

Using search terms such as audio duplex, two-way audio communication, and built-in microphone in procurement specifications, BIRN identified cameras capable of sound recording in numerous locations: railway stations in Zaječar and Lapovo, the Institute for Oncology and Radiology of Serbia in Belgrade, several schools and kindergartens, Pioneer Park and Ušće Park in Belgrade, correctional facilities in Belgrade and Sremska Mitrovica, and various social welfare institutions.

Local governments including Kula, Lazarevac, Kučevo, Valjevo, and Lučani have also purchased such equipment. According to available documentation, cameras with built-in microphones were bought for primary and secondary schools in several municipalities in the north of Kosova.

Beyond audio surveillance, automatic number plate recognition systems have become a key component of modern traffic monitoring in Serbia.

These cameras record vehicle passages, time and location, and by linking multiple cameras, it becomes possible to reconstruct routes and indirectly track vehicle owners or users. Many systems record vehicle type and color, direction of movement, and other data. Some allow GPS location and database searches.

The Municipality of Inđija purchased a system capable of registering one million license plates and searching through the database. Several cities, including Mionica, Zrenjanin, and Sombor, have integration platforms that consolidate data from multiple cameras and enable plate searches across entire connected networks.

Such technologies raise concerns. Citizens may fear that their movements are being tracked or that data collected for one purpose could be used for another. Lyon describes these as slippery technologies requiring strict regulation to prevent or at least limit unlawful or abusive application.

Facial recognition technologies are among the most invasive forms of video surveillance because they enable identification of specific individuals in physical spaces. The investigation found these systems not only within security services but also in schools and healthcare institutions.

Among newly uncovered procurements are several schools in Zrenjanin, as well as other educational institutions, kindergartens, social welfare centers, and even medical facilities that acquired equipment with advanced analytical functions including facial recognition.

People-counting systems represent another increasingly common analytical function. Beyond estimating the number of individuals in a frame, such systems generate heat maps showing areas of frequent presence and movement patterns. In some cases, software can detect specific behaviors such as large gatherings, rapid movement, running, or throwing objects.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the municipality of Smederevska Palanka purchased cameras capable of counting people and detecting physical distancing. Lyon notes that such systems carry a chilling effect on freedom of assembly, creating fear among those who might otherwise participate in public gatherings.

Drone use in surveillance has also expanded in Serbia. Various public authorities have acquired unmanned aerial vehicles, most commonly from the Chinese manufacturer DJI. While officially used for terrain monitoring, inspections, and security, they can technically be deployed for monitoring protests or tracking individuals.

Among drone purchasers are municipalities such as Kruševac, Negotin, Svrljig, Kladovo, Bor, Lazarevac, Pančevo, Loznica, Kovačica, Bač, and Mali Zvornik, as well as the Zabela Correctional Facility and the Criminalistic Police University.

Recent tenders show that the Ministry of Interior continues to modernize its drone fleet. Newer models feature hybrid zoom up to 200 times magnification, high-resolution cameras with thermal and night vision capabilities, stabilization systems, stealth modes, automatic object tracking, and real-time video transmission.

Lyon points out that police drones can be used to covertly record private spaces such as homes or vehicles. Fixed cameras are visible and predictable. Drones can appear suddenly and cover wide areas, intensifying the chilling effect because people never know when they are being observed or from where.

As technology advances, drones add yet another layer to a broader surveillance infrastructure that includes fixed cameras, license plate recognition systems, and video analytics. Together, these systems significantly expand the state’s capacity to monitor movement and activity in public space.