Government urges police to step up facial recognition

Glosses over technology's controversies

The UK government is urging police authorities to amplify their use of retrospective facial recognition (RFR) software in the pursuit of offenders.

In a letter to police chiefs, policing minister Chris Philp has recommended a target of more than 200,000 searches of still images against the Police National Database, using this technology, within the next six months.

The suggested acceleration of RFR implementation, alongside an encouragement for the broader deployment of live facial recognition cameras, has raised concerns among some MPs and privacy advocates. These critics have vehemently spoken against the utilisation of facial recognition, calling it an infringement on civil liberties and reminiscent of a dystopian surveillance state.

While proponents argue that facial recognition can bolster law enforcement efforts and enhance public safety, critics caution against the potential erosion of individual privacy rights and the escalation of unwarranted surveillance.

The case for and against

Facial recognition technology, a form of biometric identification that operates even when part of a person's face is obscured, allows authorities to compare captured images with a watch list of suspects, triggering alerts in the event of a potential match.

Despite proponents touting its crime-fighting potential, detractors - including a cross-party group of MPs and peers - have demanded an immediate cessation of live facial recognition surveillance. They cited concerns over its unchecked and indiscriminate nature; lack of explicit parliamentary approval; and potential violations of data protection and human rights regulations.

The Home Office, however, says that the use of facial recognition technology is stringently governed by existing data protection and human rights laws. The department, led by Suella Braverman, emphasised that its deployment is strictly for legitimate policing purposes, contingent upon necessity and proportionality.

AI-driven surveillance

Officials claim that AI-driven surveillance can effectively aid in the identification of individuals wanted for serious criminal offenses and contribute finding missing persons. They also argue that the integration of AI technologies can help optimise police efficiency, enabling a greater presence within communities.

The Home Office says "appropriate safeguards" are in place, including the immediate deletion of an individual's data if no match is found in the watch list. Additionally, it highlighted instances where live facial recognition technology has yielded positive outcomes, such as the apprehension of wanted suspects during a high-profile football match and the swift identification of a sex offender at a public event, subsequently leading to their apprehension and return to custody.

This, however, glosses over the controversies surrounding facial recognition. The data regulator, the ICO, previously warned the police about use of the technology; and previous trials have seen people wrongfully apprehended.

Last year, a team of researchers at Cambridge University warned that the police's use of facial recognition was neither ethical nor legal.