Mr Rahul Patwardhan is right in saying that audio-video recording in taxis looks like an elephant-size solution to an ant-size problem (Audio-video recording in taxis an elephant-size solution to ant-size problem, July 8).

What are the problems that the approved use of audio-video recording aims to tackle?

Have taxi commuters been consulted on their views on this infringement of their privacy?

Have the possible unintended consequences of allowing audio-video recording in taxis - such as blackmail and voyeurism - been carefully studied?

If the implementation of audio-video recording in taxis takes place, will passengers be allowed to reject a taxi that they've booked if it has cameras installed?

When booking a taxi, can a commuter ask for a camera-free taxi?

Will a notice that the taxi has cameras installed be displayed prominently on top of the taxi? Does a commuter have the right to ask for the cameras to be turned off?

Government ministries and agencies should be less hasty when it comes to making decisions that affect a person's right to privacy.

I urge the authority responsible for the decision to allow inward-facing cameras inside taxis and private-hire cars to make audio recordings to suspend the implementation until more public consultation is done.

Lim Ang Yong