Watching from above: Surveillance in Cape Town

Mail & Guardian

28-05-2025

Growing reliance on military-grade surveillance has drawn concern from civil society and privacy advocates.
In 2024, the City of Cape Town unveiled its Eye in the Sky (Eye) Information, Surveillance and Reconnaissance initiative — an advanced aerial technology system designed to provide real-time monitoring of activities on the ground. Marketed as a milestone in the City's crime-fighting strategy, Eye forms part of a broader push to integrate surveillance technologies into public safety and urban governance.
According to JP Smith, mayoral committee member for safety and security, the city has also invested in similar technologies to address environmental issues such as mountain fires and illegal marine poaching.
Unlike traditional drones, Eye boasts superior aerial imaging and extended operational endurance. It can fly at higher altitudes, operate longer, and function in adverse weather conditions. Equipped with infrared cameras, it detects body heat in cold water, traces residual heat from discharged firearms, and captures the thermal signatures of high-speed vehicles.
Beyond law enforcement, Eye is also used to monitor infrastructure vandalism, identify voltage anomalies in power lines, observe coastal and biodiversity zones, and track broader environmental degradation. The system is part of a growing suite of surveillance tools rolled out across Cape Town, including body-worn and dashboard cameras, ShotSpotter gunfire detection, closed-circuit television, and automatic number plate recognition. Over the past three years, the city has invested roughly R610 million in these technologies.
While service providers have not been publicly named, it is widely known that the Argos II camera system — manufactured by German defence contractor HENSOLDT — is a core component of the Eye's surveillance arsenal. Argos II significantly enhances aerial monitoring capabilities, delivering high-resolution, real-time intelligence to enforcement and emergency response teams. The company, with ties to Israeli air defence and a record of supplying military-certified IFF Mode 5 (Identification Friend or Foe) systems, also holds contracts with European militaries. Its involvement has raised questions about the militarisation of public safety in Cape Town.
This growing reliance on military-grade surveillance has drawn concern from civil society and privacy advocates. While the stated goal is public safety, critics argue that such technologies risk enabling excessive government oversight, mass data collection without consent, and the erosion of civil liberties.
The city has provided limited information about how data captured by Eye is stored, used or shared. The absence of transparency has prompted calls for stronger regulatory oversight, public consultation and the development of safeguards to prevent abuse. Legal scholars have further underscored the need for clear privacy policies that align with the Protection of Personal Information Act (Popia) and uphold constitutional protections against unreasonable searches.
These concerns are not unique to South Africa. Similar surveillance technologies have been deployed in occupied Palestine, where they function less as tools of public safety and more as instruments of population control. In cities such as Hebron and East Jerusalem — dubbed 'smart cities' — facial recognition cameras, drones, and predictive policing software track nearly every aspect of Palestinian life.
In 2023, the Red Wolf facial recognition system was introduced at West Bank checkpoints without Palestinians' consent. This program categorises individuals using a color-coded system: red for those previously arrested, yellow for those deemed resistant to occupation, and green for those considered compliant. It forms part of an effort to build a biometric database exclusively of Palestinians, flagging individuals for detention or questioning, and mapping familial and social networks. Palestinians are conscripted into this system without their knowledge or consent.
Blue Wolf, a mobile facial recognition app, is used during field operations and raids to photograph and log Palestinians, including minors, in real time. White Wolf gives Israeli settlers access to government databases to verify Palestinians' permit status — an alarming breach of privacy and a dangerous outsourcing of state surveillance.
All of these systems feed into Wolf Pack, a centralised data-collection program that builds profiles on Palestinians, including names, addresses, family connections and vehicle registrations. This creation of an exclusive, ethnicity-based surveillance infrastructure establishes a digital racial hierarchy. As many have warned, databases built around ethnic identity seldom end in justice.
As one anonymous former Israeli general stated: 'There is a lot of tension between basic human rights or privacy and military occupation … This is more about control than counterterrorism.'
In other words, surveillance is the backbone of occupation.
These practices are echoed in Cape Town, where recent crackdowns on Palestinian solidarity protests suggest a shift toward similar methods of population control. Surveillance tools such as EPIC devices have reportedly been deployed to monitor, track and profile protestors. Concurrently, meetings between Cape Town mayor Geordin Hill-Lewis and the South African Police Service have sought strategies to suppress dissent. These developments are especially troubling in light of the Democratic Alliance's controversial visit to Israel — condemned by South Africa's department of international relations and cooperation and contrary to the country's official stance on Palestine.
The Eye in the Sky system raises significant legal concerns under section 14 of the Constitution of South Africa and the Protection of Personal Information Act. By capturing thermal imagery, facial data and behavioural patterns without consent or judicial oversight, the City risks violating constitutional protections against arbitrary surveillance. Popia mandates that personal information be collected lawfully and transparently. Yet, the absence of public-facing data policies — on retention, third-party sharing (including with foreign defence contractors), and mechanisms for redress — raises the possibility of unlawful surveillance practices.
Ultimately, Cape Town's Eye in the Sky risks a dangerous global trend: the quiet normalisation of military-grade surveillance in civilian life. Surveillance becomes a silent border — policing movement, suppressing protest and deepening exclusion in ways that are difficult to see and harder to challenge.
As digital surveillance becomes embedded in urban governance, the fundamental question is not just how technology is used, but who it serves. Without enforceable safeguards, transparent governance, and meaningful public consultation, these systems will serve power — not people. In a constitutional democracy like South Africa, a rights-based, legally compliant, and ethically sound approach to security must not be optional — it must be non-negotiable.
Sõzarn Barday is a writer and attorney based in South Africa and has a particular interest in human rights in the Middle East. Opinions shared represent her individual perspective.