(Obviously a lot of people will grant it, but a sufficiently motivated person - human-rights activist, political dissenter, journalist, etc etc - might not)
For the rest of us where physical coercion to unlock the phone isn’t in the threat model, it really does improve on the trade offs between security and convenience.
Feels disproportionate to say we should not do the latter because of the former.
On the other side burglars can get into a house and force people to unlock their phones or reveal their passwords, if they care to. There is no protection against that unless those people value their secrets more than the harm the burglars will do to them.
All considered, I unlock with my fingerprints.
This is not the case, at least, the law is not very settled in that direction. There has been at least one famous case  where an appeals court found that a defendant could be help in contempt of court and imprisoned for refusing to provide his password.
Everyone has something valuable to lose.
Are there more criminals in that country as opposed to other places?
What Italy has, though, is very violent and abusive law enforcement, to the point where it's unbecoming of a first-world country.
So I can definitely see how that would be a concern.
Just off the top of my head:
- 2001 raid on Armando Diaz. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Raid_on_Armando_Diaz
"The detainees were given few or no blankets, kept awake by guards, given little or no food and denied their statutory right to make phone calls and see a lawyer. They could hear crying and screaming from other cells. Police doctors at the facility also participated in the torture, using ritual humiliation, threats of rape and deprivation of water, food, sleep and medical care."
None of the responsible parties served any time.
- Way too many to count cold blooded murders of people in custody. The Aldrovandi, Cucchi and Magherini cases are emblematic as they at least got covered by the media.
- Violence against minorities, for example: https://www.statewatch.org/media/documents/news/2009/mar/Eve...
- Illegal detentions, for example: https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-07-28/califo...
- General lack of accountability and transparency.
- Widespread abuse of power by intimidation.
- Flat out lies, helped by crap media. I'll bet you $1,000 that on Dec 25, 2021, the news will report a variant of the following story: an elderly person called the police because they were lonely and wanted a friend to share a glass of spumante with.
That's 20 years ago, if there is widespread abuse, you'd have something in mind more recent.
let me rephrase, the italian police does actively get your pictures, cross checks you, and do a profile about you without even being recognized as a previously person of interest to law enforcement
2) What happened there was so bad Italy was found in violation of ECHR. That nothing has substantially changed is in and of itself a major part of the problem.
That little loophole right there would soon be big enough to let through a freight train.
Our politicians might be convinced to introduce token pieces of legislation that can conveniently be voted down by the other side, and just enough of their fellow party members. But that's about it.
The US change from a fixed 28 year term that could be renewed once to a life of author + 50 years term was done to match the minimum term allowed under the Berne Convention, which most of the world had already done decades before.
In 1998 the US lengthened the term again, to life + 70 years. That one was to match Europe, which had made that change in 1993.
We don't need to block it. We need to embrace it and make sure it's used properly, safely and with accountability. We're not talking about nuclear warheads here. There has to be a safe and secure way to get the benefits of large-scale and centralized facial-recognition and tracking.
True, we're talking about something worse. The danger is higher and the detectability and barriers to entry are lower.
This has never worked, period.
No, we're not. Those damage the physical world. Facial recognition will damage something else in the long run - the society - which is just as dangerous.
After that what benefits are there for creating a database with everyone historical location?