The growing reliance on biometric data for citizenship and residency applications has sparked a series of privacy concerns across Europe and beyond. While many states collect fingerprints, facial scans, retinal images, and even DNA, several recent incidents highlight systemic failures in data handling, legal oversight, and discrimination. At the same time, a handful of jurisdictions continue to offer citizenship without requiring any biometric collection, appealing to individuals who prioritize privacy.
Recent biometric controversies in Europe
| Country / Region | Issue | Key Details |
|---|---|---|
| France | Illegal retention of fingerprint data | The CNIL (French privacy watchdog) found that the national FAED database stored fingerprints and personal data for over 6 million people beyond the legally permitted period, with poor paper‑record management and limited transparency. Authorities were ordered to delete millions of records and improve compliance, though no fine was imposed. |
| European Union | EU‑wide fingerprint requirement struck down | In March 2024, the Court of Justice of the EU invalidated a 2019 regulation that mandated fingerprints on national ID cards, ruling that the legal basis was flawed. Critics described the rule as disproportionate and a heightened risk for identity theft. Member states must phase out the requirement by December 2026. |
| United Kingdom | Unauthorized copying of biometric data | UK authorities were found to have duplicated fingerprint data from the “Shingen” databases, breaching data‑sharing rules. The leak exposed information on roughly 500 000 non‑EU individuals, with the data reportedly shared with contractors and potentially accessible to U.S. government agencies. |
| United Kingdom (police) | Discriminatory use of mobile fingerprint scanners | Police in England and Wales conducted hundreds of thousands of mobile fingerprint scans, disproportionately targeting Black Britons—some areas recorded scan rates up to 23 times higher for Black individuals than for white individuals. Civil‑rights groups warned that the practice reinforces systemic bias and lacks adequate safeguards. |
| Czech Republic | Covert biometric facial‑recognition surveillance | Czech police allegedly uploaded facial images to a system that linked them with identity and travel databases without public knowledge or legal authorization. The tool enabled instant identification and access to sensitive personal data. |
These cases illustrate how biometric collection can outpace legal frameworks, leading to privacy violations, potential identity theft, and discriminatory enforcement.
Citizenship options that avoid biometric collection (as of 2025)
| Jurisdiction | Biometrics Requirement | Investment / Cost | Notable Features |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vanuatu | None – no fingerprints, retinal scans, or DNA required | Total program cost ≈ US $115 000 for a family of four; includes a refundable investment component of US $50 000 returned after four years, effectively reducing the cost to about US $20 000 per passport. | Considered the most affordable “citizenship‑by‑investment” (CBI) program with a relatively quick processing time. |
| Nauru | None – biometric data not collected | Approx. US $165 000 plus processing fees for a family unit. | Slightly higher cost than Vanuatu; reputation as a CBI program is still developing, with fewer years of operation. |
| Confidential West African program | None – biometric data not collected | Details undisclosed; program is marketed as a private, confidential citizenship option. | Name withheld to protect the program from external pressure; described as a “private citizenship by exception.” |
These three pathways allow applicants to obtain a second passport without submitting fingerprints, facial scans, retinal images, or DNA, thereby preserving greater personal privacy.
Practical considerations for privacy‑focused citizenship seekers
- Legal certainty – Verify that the issuing authority explicitly states that no biometric data will be collected. Some programs may change policies, so obtain written confirmation.
- Investment recovery – Programs like Vanuatu include a refundable component; assess the timeline and conditions for repayment before committing funds.
- Processing speed – Many CBI schemes aim for rapid issuance (30–90 days). Confirm current processing times, as they can fluctuate with regulatory changes.
- Reputation and stability – Established programs (e.g., Vanuatu) tend to have clearer legal frameworks and international recognition, while newer or confidential options may carry higher political or reputational risk.
- Travel freedom – Evaluate the passport’s visa‑free access compared with other options; lower biometric requirements may come with more limited travel privileges.
For individuals concerned about the expanding scope of state‑run biometric databases, selecting a citizenship that deliberately avoids such data collection can mitigate exposure to the privacy breaches highlighted above. However, applicants should balance privacy benefits against factors such as cost, investment return, and the overall credibility of the issuing jurisdiction.
