The right to know: Comparative analysis of notification requirements in public space surveillance systems

The proliferation of advanced surveillance technologies in public spaces presents unprecedented challenges to privacy rights and democratic governance. While authorities gain extensive visibility into citizens’ lives through artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) capabilities, a critical ‘transparency asymmetry’ has emerged between state surveillance capabilities and citizens’ awareness of such monitoring. This paper employs comparative legal analysis, examining constitutional provisions, legislation, administrative regulations and court decisions across multiple jurisdictions, with a primary focus on the European Union (EU) and the US. The study draws upon primary legal sources, academic literature, policy documents and technical standards to evaluate the effectiveness of various notification approaches. The analysis reveals three fundamental structural failures in existing notification systems: (1) a disconnect between formal notification and substantive understanding of surveillance implications, particularly in systems incorporating AI; (2) ‘consent fatigue’ that undermines notification effectiveness; and (3) fragmented standards creating significant accountability gaps in privacy protection. The EU has developed comprehensive notification requirements through the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) framework and court decisions, while the US maintains a more limited ‘notice-and-choice’ approach. This paper proposes a dynamic constitutional notice framework that reconceptualises notification requirements as dynamic constitutional obligations rather than static procedural rules. This framework bridges the European dignity-based and US property-centric approaches while providing flexible implementation mechanisms that can adapt to emerging technologies while preserving democratic oversight.