Europe’s aviation industry wants biometrics to remain optional. Major airport, airline and travel-technology groups are urging EU lawmakers to ensure new digital rules do not unintentionally restrict the voluntary use of biometric identification at airports, DKNews.kz reports.
ACI EUROPE, Amadeus, IATA, IDEMIA Public Security and SITA have formed a Travel Ecosystem Coalition for the Responsible Use of Biometrics. The group wants the EU’s Digital Omnibus initiative to allow secure biometric processing while preserving passengers’ right to refuse it, protect their privacy and use conventional document checks instead.
The industry’s position is straightforward: biometrics can make airport procedures faster, but they should not become a mandatory condition for travel.
74% of travelers are ready to use biometrics instead of documents
According to the IATA Global Passenger Survey, 74% of respondents said they would be willing to provide biometric data instead of repeatedly presenting a passport or boarding pass.
For airports, the attraction goes beyond convenience.
Biometric identification can reduce repeated manual document checks, speed up passenger processing and help terminals make better use of existing capacity. The benefit is particularly significant during peak travel periods, when passenger flow becomes one of the biggest operational constraints.
The coalition is calling for technology-neutral regulation. In practice, that means EU rules should not favor one specific system but should allow secure biometric solutions where appropriate, while ensuring that passengers who do not want to use them retain a non-biometric alternative.
Passengers should also be able to delete their data
Privacy is at the center of the coalition’s proposal.
Passengers should decide for themselves whether to provide biometric information. They should also be able to request that their data be deleted.
“The use of biometrics in travel should always be based on passenger choice and voluntary participation,” the coalition said in its manifesto.
Under this approach, biometrics would not become a requirement for boarding a flight. Travelers who choose it could use a faster digital journey, while others would continue to pass through conventional identity and document checks.
Global passenger traffic could reach 12.4 billion by 2050
Behind the debate over privacy lies a much larger challenge: the expected growth of global aviation.
According to ICAO projections, global passenger traffic could reach 12.4 billion travelers a year by 2050, almost three times the 2024 level.
Not every airport will be able to respond by simply building new terminals and runways.
That is why the industry is looking for technologies that can process more passengers through existing infrastructure. Biometrics are one of those tools: instead of checking the same passport repeatedly at different stages of a journey, a traveler’s identity can potentially be verified digitally across several checkpoints.
The debate also matters for Kazakhstan
Kazakhstan is moving in the same direction as airports become more digital.
Earlier, we reported that 14 airports in Kazakhstan underwent a digital audit, with SITA and the country’s transport authorities examining automation of passenger processing, check-in, baggage handling and biometric identification.
Kazakhstan already has some experience with replacing physical documents at certain stages of domestic travel. Digital identity documents in eGov Mobile can be used in a number of airports for domestic flights.
Biometrics would be a more substantial step.
A digital ID simply moves a document onto a smartphone. A biometric system uses a passenger’s face or another physical identifier to confirm identity during different stages of the journey.
If such systems become standard across major international airports, Kazakh airlines and airports will increasingly need technology that can work with global digital travel infrastructure.
For the industry, however, one condition remains non-negotiable: biometrics should make travel easier without taking away the passenger’s right to choose.
