On April 13th, 2005, a petition was filed by Mr. Chun of North Jeolla Province Peace and Human Rights Solidarity with the National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRC) against the Superintendent of North Jeolla Provincial Office of Education. In the complaint, Mr. Chun stated that 「14 schools in 6 cities of North Jeolla Province have installed the fingerprint recognition system in cafeterias and required students’ fingerprint.」 In response, NHRC recommended (1) the Superintendent of North Jeolla Provincial Office of Education to guide and supervise all schools not to employ similar systems such as the fingerprint system indiscriminately so that personal information is not excessively collected, stored or stolen, and (2) the Minister of Education and Human Resources Development to supervise all public and private schools across the nation in a constant manner to prevent similar cases from occurring.
Among the 14 schools, NHRC investigated one high school, one girls high school, one middle school and one girls middle school. At these schools they found (1) students entered their names and student numbers through a keyboard, and then their fingerprints are scanned and saved, and (2) the students were verifying their fingerprints on the terminal at every meal.
The schools said they installed the systems on the following grounds: (1) the fingerprint recognition system makes it easier for them to know who applied for the meal and those who did not, and to simplify tracking students comings and goings; (2) the system shortens the meal time; (3) the system prevents student ID cards from being lost, damaged or transferred; (4) and the installed system allows the schools to control the entrance and exit of the students.
Biometric information such as one’s fingerprint can be obtained from only that person, unlike other personal information, and is unchangeable and universal. However, (1) that kind of information is easily saved in a database and (2) the accumulated information easily provides a record of the person concerned. All in all, this information can be used for other purposes that infringe on privacy and endangers the liberty of citizens.
Also, companies that manufacture fingerprint recognition systems argue that the fingerprint information has been converted into a binary code so that the information cannot be leaked. However, (1) the binary code itself is an identifiable index. (2) The current technology makes it possible for the registered fingerprint information to be copied and transferred to other files when the information changes into binary code. So information can be possibly leaked unless all the processes are checked and confirmed. Furthermore, (3) it’s at a stage where the technical reliability hasn’t been tested enough, and there is the possibility of system errors.
National Human Rights Commission concluded as follows:
1. There must be a legal basis with regards to collection, storage, computerization and the use of sensitive biometric information for public organizations to limit the right to control personal information.
2. An examination must be conducted before the system is employed to check whether the biometric information recognition system is an appropriate means and whether its use is suitable.
3. The concerned party shall participate in the process of the implementation,
4. Especially, there needs to be stricter standards, such as requiring the person’s consent.
In addition, NHRC found that even though the process was adopted as means to authorize or identify a person by using biometric information, safety measure must be taken to prevent technical hazards.
Also, according to the NHRC:
