| Abstract: | Post-9/11, law-enforcement agencies have expanded the processing of personal data for terrorist profiles; this is actually among the very reasons why personal data are processed in the first place. De facto terrorist profiles tend to be based predominantly on the use of such criteria as ‘race’, colour, religion, or ethnic and national origin to single out persons for enhanced scrutiny. Terrorist-profiling practices, therefore, raise the question as to their conformity with the right to privacy, the protection of personal data, and the principle of non-discrimination. This article critically examines to what extent, if any, terrorist-profiling practices may be regarded as compatible with the principle of non-discrimination and the fundamental rules pertaining to the protection of personal data. For this purpose, it looks at various approaches to defining profiling in the context of countering terrorism, as well as describing de facto manifestations of terrorist-profiling practices. The conclusion is that terrorist-profiling practices all too often fail to comply with the fundamental requirement that any restrictions on the right to privacy and the protection of personal data are adequately regulated, necessary and proportionate. The so-called ethnic profiling gives rise to particularly serious problems. It tends to assume the nature of ‘racial’ profiling and, accordingly, entail discriminatory effects that can result in feelings of humiliation and stigmatisation among the targeted groups. Since the risk of further marginalisation and even radicalisation within those groups also appears to be a very real consideration, the whole necessity of ethnic profiling in the name of countering terrorism must be called into question in a contemporary democratic society built on the principles of pluralism and respect for different cultures. |
