I see no reason why bodies like this can have access to sensitive data about individuals without requiring a warrant.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/...
The event was polarising and you had your anti-rioter camp and anti-police camp. It should not be hard to see how there would have been direct chains of command on either side which could facilitate data misuse.
If you want a hard example, look at Hong Kong: protestors getting arrested via all manner of tracking, but also police's family being doxxed by protestors.
Also see Belarus and now Myanmar.
Things are all fine and dandy, until they aren't.
This is why you need checks and balances.
I'm very unlikely speak up enough to become a target, but the next Dr. King, the next Snowden, the opponents of the next Trump or next J. Edgar Hoover are going to have big problems if privacy continues on its present course.
Privacy isn't currently a big problem for the average citizen in our society, but it's very important fat-tail event insurance to have in the future. By the time you realize you need to worry about privacy, it's probably already too late. History has shown liberal democracies are at best metastable (all governments tending toward authoritarianism if not actively maintained) and whistleblowers are an important stabilizing force.
[0] https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/7-easiest-felonies-to-com...
[1] http://thinkaboutnow.com/2016/07/average-americans-commit-3-...