A push back to Czech football club‘s plan to install facial recognition CCTV system
There is a debate in the Czech Republic over the use of facial recognition cameras in stadiums. Both clubs and politicians are calling for biometric surveillance after hundreds of fans stormed the football pitch during a recent match. The debate has unfolded with pushbacks from the public opinion and digital rights groups, including IuRe, while government officials are still considering the implementation of biometric system regardless of their illegality.
When match safety is underestimated
Saturday, May 9, 2026, will go down as a dark milestone in Czech football history. Just a few minutes before the end of the Prague derby between Sparta and Slavia, hundreds of Slavia fans stormed the pitch, and smoke from flares filled the air.
Dozens of masked Slavia fans then threw some of the flares into the section where Sparta fans were seated. There was even a minor assault on three Sparta players.
Yet the outrageous conduct of the fans — who ultimately cost their own club the victory — should not overshadow the equally serious failures of the organisers. Security personnel appeared completely unprepared and did nothing to prevent the chaos.
“We will implement biometric surveillance and impose fines”
Jaroslav Tvrdík, president of Slavia Prague, apologised for the events and took full responsibility. At the same time, however, he attempted to shift the narrative in a surprising direction. He did not explain why security was completely unprepared or why fans were allowed to gather behind the goal moments before the pitch invasion. Instead, he pointed the finger at the European Union and its legislation for not allowing to have facial recognition cameras in the stadium.
Tvrdík stated: “It really pains me that we have this system (face recognition cameras) installed for 16 million crowns; we could turn it on and immediately know who did it. Unfortunately, we live in the European Union, which prioritises the right to data protection over the safety of stadium visitors.”
Even more controversial was another statement, in which he said: “This week I requested a meeting with the chairman of the Office for Personal Data Protection. The owner of Slavia (Pavel Tykač) told me this morning that we should activate those systems. Let them fine us; we’ll pay them. Until the courts ban it, we’ll use it to identify violent offenders and rioters. I suppose we need to escalate the situation and decide whether the priority here is protecting public health or protecting data.”
Criticism from experts and protests across football clubs
By Sunday, May 17, the situation changed dramatically. It was right after a meeting at the aforementioned Office for Personal Data Protection – which reportedly lasted three and a half hours – that Tvrdík stated that biometric surveillance at his club’s stadium would not be implemented after all.
According to Tvrdík, the key “obstacle” was the Artificial Intelligence Act. He also claimed he had been warned that deploying these systems could expose him to criminal liability, including prison sentences of two to three years and fines amounting to hundreds of millions of crowns.
Lawyers from IuRe, EDRi member, had already argued the previous week that such biometric surveillance would be illegal.
Fans from various clubs also voiced their opposition. A week after the scandal, they unfurled a banner at several stadiums reading: “Tvrdík, scan your conscience, not our faces.”
For the first time in Czech Republic, opposition to biometric surveillance extended far beyond the digital rights community.
Biometric surveillance in the Czech Republic: constantly on the edge of legality
With IuRe’s efforts, the biometric system at Václav Havel Airport in Prague was shut down last year due to non-compliance with the Artificial Intelligence Act. Unfortunately, following the passage of the necessary legislation and court approval, the system has since then been reactivated.
Three years ago, IuRe lawyers drew attention to the “Digital Image of Persons” system operated by the Czech police. The system uses millions of photos from ID cards and passports. Each photograph in the database is linked to an individual identifier, through which the police officer can then easily access other data such as the first name, last name, residence or date of birth of the person in the selected photograph. By the way the system it is designed, it technically allows uploading photographs from social networks or cameras into such a system for identification purposes. The Office for Personal Data Protection later confirmed that the system lacks a sufficient legal basis.
More recently, IuRe identified additional shortcomings – specifically, a lack of a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) – in the implementation of the EyeDentity system used by two regional police headquarters.
The current soccer controversy could ultimately help ensure that the debate on biometric surveillance is based not on fleeting feelings and emotions, but on existing legislation. It is precisely this European legislation – closely monitored and commented on by EDRi organisations – that has so far successfully prevented the use of facial recognition from spreading beyond airports into public spaces in the Czech Republic.
At the same time, however, several Czech government politicians continue pushing for legislation that would permit – or even require – the use of facial recognition cameras. Many adopted this position in the aftermath of the recent scandal. The incident also revealed that many soccer clubs already have camera systems technically capable of facial recognition, even if those systems are not yet in operation.
For now, Slavia’s decision not to turn on its cameras is just one battle in what is likely to become a much broader conflict over privacy and surveillance in Czech football stadiums.
Contribution by: EDRi member, IuRe (Iuridicum Remedium)