Metropolitan Police's Facial Recognition Technology Under Scrutiny for Human Rights Breaches
In This Article
HIGHLIGHTS
- The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) criticizes the Metropolitan Police's use of live facial recognition technology, citing breaches of human rights law.
- The EHRC has been granted permission to intervene in a judicial review, arguing the technology's use is neither necessary nor proportionate.
- Concerns include potential racial bias and violations of privacy, freedom of expression, and assembly rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.
- The Metropolitan Police defends its use of the technology, claiming it is lawful and aids in crime reduction.
- Civil rights groups and privacy advocates oppose the technology, highlighting risks of misidentification and lack of specific legislation.
The Metropolitan Police's deployment of live facial recognition technology (LFR) has come under intense scrutiny from the UK's Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), which claims the practice breaches human rights laws. The technology, which scans faces captured on CCTV and matches them against a police watchlist, has been used to make over 1,000 arrests since January 2024. However, the EHRC argues that its use is neither necessary nor proportionate, raising significant privacy concerns.
Legal and Ethical Concerns
The EHRC has been granted permission to intervene in an upcoming judicial review, emphasizing that the current policy of the Metropolitan Police falls short of necessary legal standards. John Kirkpatrick, the EHRC's chief executive, stated, "There must be clear rules which guarantee that live facial recognition technology is used only where necessary, proportionate, and constrained by appropriate safeguards." The EHRC's intervention is supported by data indicating a disproportionate number of black men being flagged by the technology, raising concerns of racial bias.
Police Defense and Public Safety
Despite the criticism, the Metropolitan Police maintains that its use of LFR is both lawful and proportionate, asserting that it plays a crucial role in keeping Londoners safe. A spokesperson for the Met highlighted that the Court of Appeal has affirmed the police's ability to use LFR under Common Law powers. The technology has been credited with aiding in the arrest of suspected offenders, including alleged paedophiles and violent robbers.
Civil Liberties and Privacy Concerns
Civil rights groups and privacy advocates have consistently opposed the use of LFR, arguing that it invades privacy and poses a risk of misidentification. Rebecca Vincent, interim director of Big Brother Watch, described the EHRC's intervention as "hugely welcome," emphasizing the pressing human rights concerns associated with the rapid proliferation of LFR technology without specific legislation. The EHRC's concerns focus on potential violations of privacy, freedom of expression, and assembly rights as outlined in the European Convention on Human Rights.
WHAT THIS MIGHT MEAN
The judicial review, bolstered by the EHRC's intervention, could lead to significant changes in how facial recognition technology is regulated and deployed by law enforcement in the UK. Should the review find the Metropolitan Police's use of LFR unlawful, it may prompt the introduction of specific legislation governing its use, addressing current gaps in legal oversight. Additionally, the case could set a precedent for other jurisdictions grappling with similar privacy and human rights concerns, potentially influencing broader European policies on surveillance technology.
Related Articles
UK Clinical Trial on Puberty Blockers Paused Amid Safety Concerns
US Supreme Court Ruling on Tariffs Sparks Uncertainty for UK and Global Trade
UK Police Intensify Investigation into Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor Amid Misconduct Allegations
Prince Andrew's Arrest Raises Questions About Royal Succession and Monarchy's Future
UK Government Eases Deer Culling to Protect Woodlands and Farmland
UN Report: Sudan's El Fasher Siege Shows Genocide Hallmarks
Metropolitan Police's Facial Recognition Technology Under Scrutiny for Human Rights Breaches
In This Article
Himanshu Kaushik| Published HIGHLIGHTS
- The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) criticizes the Metropolitan Police's use of live facial recognition technology, citing breaches of human rights law.
- The EHRC has been granted permission to intervene in a judicial review, arguing the technology's use is neither necessary nor proportionate.
- Concerns include potential racial bias and violations of privacy, freedom of expression, and assembly rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.
- The Metropolitan Police defends its use of the technology, claiming it is lawful and aids in crime reduction.
- Civil rights groups and privacy advocates oppose the technology, highlighting risks of misidentification and lack of specific legislation.
The Metropolitan Police's deployment of live facial recognition technology (LFR) has come under intense scrutiny from the UK's Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), which claims the practice breaches human rights laws. The technology, which scans faces captured on CCTV and matches them against a police watchlist, has been used to make over 1,000 arrests since January 2024. However, the EHRC argues that its use is neither necessary nor proportionate, raising significant privacy concerns.
Legal and Ethical Concerns
The EHRC has been granted permission to intervene in an upcoming judicial review, emphasizing that the current policy of the Metropolitan Police falls short of necessary legal standards. John Kirkpatrick, the EHRC's chief executive, stated, "There must be clear rules which guarantee that live facial recognition technology is used only where necessary, proportionate, and constrained by appropriate safeguards." The EHRC's intervention is supported by data indicating a disproportionate number of black men being flagged by the technology, raising concerns of racial bias.
Police Defense and Public Safety
Despite the criticism, the Metropolitan Police maintains that its use of LFR is both lawful and proportionate, asserting that it plays a crucial role in keeping Londoners safe. A spokesperson for the Met highlighted that the Court of Appeal has affirmed the police's ability to use LFR under Common Law powers. The technology has been credited with aiding in the arrest of suspected offenders, including alleged paedophiles and violent robbers.
Civil Liberties and Privacy Concerns
Civil rights groups and privacy advocates have consistently opposed the use of LFR, arguing that it invades privacy and poses a risk of misidentification. Rebecca Vincent, interim director of Big Brother Watch, described the EHRC's intervention as "hugely welcome," emphasizing the pressing human rights concerns associated with the rapid proliferation of LFR technology without specific legislation. The EHRC's concerns focus on potential violations of privacy, freedom of expression, and assembly rights as outlined in the European Convention on Human Rights.
WHAT THIS MIGHT MEAN
The judicial review, bolstered by the EHRC's intervention, could lead to significant changes in how facial recognition technology is regulated and deployed by law enforcement in the UK. Should the review find the Metropolitan Police's use of LFR unlawful, it may prompt the introduction of specific legislation governing its use, addressing current gaps in legal oversight. Additionally, the case could set a precedent for other jurisdictions grappling with similar privacy and human rights concerns, potentially influencing broader European policies on surveillance technology.
Related Articles
UK Clinical Trial on Puberty Blockers Paused Amid Safety Concerns
US Supreme Court Ruling on Tariffs Sparks Uncertainty for UK and Global Trade
UK Police Intensify Investigation into Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor Amid Misconduct Allegations
Prince Andrew's Arrest Raises Questions About Royal Succession and Monarchy's Future
UK Government Eases Deer Culling to Protect Woodlands and Farmland
UN Report: Sudan's El Fasher Siege Shows Genocide Hallmarks