The decision of the government of Wuhu, Anhui province, to install video cameras inside the city's taxis to prevent possible crimes against the driver has triggered a wave of debates in the Chinese media.

While the majority of the public support the decision, as was indicated by an online survey, a considerable number of people, especially some "experts" and "scholars", voiced their concerns over possible "infringements of a citizen's right to privacy".

It is understandable that people worry about the possibility of having their private secrets exposed. But the clamor of some media commentators is really nauseating.

Related readings:  Cameras on taxi draw public ire in E. China

With the process of urbanization speeding up and the disparity between the rich and poor widening, crime rates have soared in China's cities. Cities have successively equipped public places with surveillance cameras in order to obtain clues to crimes and to deter offenders. But whenever the government plans to install more cameras, there are always some commentators crying out about "the public's right to privacy".

This time, they argue that taxi drivers' safety is being achieved at the cost of passengers' privacy.

"The passenger has paid for the use of the cab and therefore owns the space inside the vehicle during the ride," one commentator wrote, suggesting that whatever the passenger does should be shielded from watching eyes.

This is against reason. What a passenger buys in a taxi ride is a faster way of reaching his/her destination rather than the seat he/she sits on.

I wonder what kind of conduct a passenger could display inside a taxi that warrants such secrecy.

The example most frequently cited by opponents of surveillance cameras in public places is a video clip of a couple of lovers engaged in passionate kissing and hugging in a subway station in Shanghai that was widely broadcast online.

However, this example does nothing to support the argument against surveillance lenses. First, the lovers had relinquished their right to privacy when they kissed and hugged in public. Second, the exposure of the lovers' images was not because of the existence of the surveillance camera, but rather because of a few dirty-minded people posting the clipping online and some like-minded media outlets rebroadcasting it.

The role of surveillance cameras in public places in protecting people and cracking down on crimes is obvious. For instance, many hit-and-run motorists who killed or injured passers-by were caught by the police thanks to the recordings of the cameras installed in streets.

The absence of monitoring devices, however, has left eternal regrets to families.

On July 25, a 60-year-old sanitation worker was sweeping a road in Hohhot, Inner Mongolia autonomous region, when a coal truck knocked her down and ran over her. More trucks followed closely and none of them stopped - all ran over the dead woman and sped off.

The police are investigating the case trying to locate the trucks but no clues have been found so far.

The case would have long been cracked if the road had been equipped with cameras.

I know of no less than a dozen cases in which some valiant citizen has fought a thief or a street thug and been injured, but no onlookers cooperated with the police.

Opponents argue that surveillance cameras are not a panacea for police in the fight against crimes. This is true. But, they are definitely an effective aid to police investigations.

Any society consists of both rights and obligations on the part of its citizens. We Chinese have now fostered a strong sense of private rights under the coaching of various experts but seem to have not developed as strong a sense of obligation.

I hope our experts and commentators will also write something about citizens' obligations to help maintain a safe and orderly society while telling them how to protect their private rights.

The author is Assistant Editor-in-Chief of China Daily

and can be reached at

E-mail: liushinan@chinadaily.com.cn.

(China Daily 09/29/2010 page8)