PUNJAB’S decision to extend its digital surveillance network should be appreciated. However, the question is what the government does with the vast amount of data it is collecting. The expansion to 98 tehsils will take the network well beyond its existing urban footprint. The present network uses systems such as automatic vehicle registration-plate recognition, facial recognition, video analytics and crime-pattern analysis. The potential benefits are considerable. Properly integrated surveillance can improve police response, help identify suspects and stolen vehicles, provide digital evidence, map crime patterns and allow scarce policing resources to be deployed effectively. It can also improve traffic management and response to women’s safety and crime reporting. But cameras alone do not make cities safer.

The government appears to be expanding the hardware much faster than it is developing the institutional capacity to turn data into intelligence. This is where the project needs greater attention. Punjab is generating an enormous stream of potentially valuable data from cameras, emergency calls, traffic systems, police records and other digital platforms. However, there is little public evidence that this information is being systematically combined and analysed to understand the causes, patterns and geography of crime. The reported 70pc reduction in serious crime is encouraging, but such claims need independent verification. A fall in reported incidents in areas covered by cameras is not, by itself, proof that surveillance caused the decline. The larger opportunity lies in using the network as a public safety intelligence system rather than treating it primarily as a surveillance project. Data should be integrated with police investigation, prosecution and court outcomes. This could help explain why cases fail, where investigations break down and which policing interventions work. There is another requirement: safeguards. As surveillance expands into union councils and public spaces, rules governing access, retention, sharing and use of personal data become essential. Facial recognition and other AI tools should not become a licence for indiscriminate monitoring. Access to sensitive data must be logged and audited, with penalties for misuse. The technology can improve policing, but only if the authorities develop the analytical capacity, accountability and institutional discipline needed to extract its full value.

Published in Dawn, September 28th, 2026