76 The decision to film people participating in a public gathering may influence their behaviour, sometimes reducing the likelihood of disorder and sometimes triggering an aggressive reaction.114 The manner in which the recording is captured can influence the reaction of those being recorded, e.g., when a law enforcement officer stands very close to the person it can be perceived as aggressive or provocative.115 According to a UN report on the management of public assemblies, “[r]ecording peaceful assembly participants in a context and manner that intimidates or harasses is an impermissible interference [with the rights to freedom of assembly, association and expression].”116 The use of interception technologies could potentially enable law enforcement agencies to access and store personal and private information without a warrant and without the knowledge of those targeted. Similarly, police could use these technologies to pinpoint the location of specific people or to identify all people within a specific area, again without their knowledge or a warrant. For example, IMSIcatchers can retrieve the unique identifying numbers of all mobile phones within range, and these phones could then be matched to their owners through subscriber data.117 This could lead to arbitrary investigations or other actions against people who were not engaged in illegal activity, including passers-by. Facial recognition systems can be inaccurate (generating false positive identifications) and contain built in biases that lead to certain groups being disproportionately targeted.118 The 2018 UN Human Rights Council resolution on “The Promotion and Protection of Human Rights in the Context of Peaceful Protests” noted the importance of being able to use communications technologies securely and privately for the organization and 114 United Kingdom College of Policing, “Public Order: Tactical Options”, United Kingdom College of Policing website , <ht tps:// w w w.app.c ollege.p olic e.uk /app -c ontent/public-order/ planning-and-deployment/tactical-options/#evidence-gathering-team>. 115 ODIHR, Human Rights Handbook on Policing Assemblies, op. cit., note 2, p. 70. 116 UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association and the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, “Joint Report Submitted to the Human Rights Council on the Management of Public Assemblies”, op. cit., note 92, para. 76. 117 Richards, S.; Hernandez, J & MacDonald-Evoy, J., “Cellphone Surveillance Used on Black Lives Matter Protesters at Fourth Precinct in Minneapolis”, North Star Post, 7 December 2015, <https:// w w w.nstarpost.com/news/cellphone-sur veillance-used-on-black-lives-matter-protestersat-fourth-precinct-in-minneapolis/>. 118 Privacy International, “Submission to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights in the Context of Peaceful Protests”, op. cit., note 110, <https://privacyinternational.org/sites/default/files/2019-12/PI%20OHCHR%20 peaceful%20protest%20submission%20October%202019.pdf>.