The Metropolitan Police’s use of facial recognition technology sparks debate over safety versus privacy concerns, with over 500 arrests made this year alone.
London: The Metropolitan Police has been ramping up its use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology. They claim it’s been effective in catching offenders who pose a serious risk to the community.
This year alone, they’ve made over 500 arrests using these cameras. Among those arrested are 50 suspects linked to serious violence against women and girls, plus 50 sex offenders who violated court orders.
While some folks see this tech as a way to keep dangerous criminals off the streets, others are worried. Campaign groups warn it could lead to misidentifications and create a “dystopian surveillance state” where everyone feels like a suspect.
So, what exactly is LFR? It’s a real-time system that uses live camera feeds to compare faces of people passing by against a watchlist. The College of Policing says it helps find missing persons or those with outstanding warrants.
The first time LFR was used in England and Wales was during the 2017 UEFA Champions League final. But before that, Leicestershire Police scanned 90,000 faces at a music festival in 2015, checking them against a list of wanted criminals.
Only a couple of police forces, like the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police, have a permanent setup for LFR. They usually deploy it at big events or busy areas, often using mobile vans that clearly inform the public about the operation.
When a camera picks up a face, it maps out features like the distance between the eyes and the jawline length. This data is then compared to the watchlist. If there’s a match, an alert goes to an engagement team to check in with the person.
Some police forces also use retrospective facial recognition, which involves analyzing images from regular CCTV later on to identify suspects in ongoing investigations.
Supporters of LFR, like the Metropolitan Police, argue it allows for a smarter approach to fighting crime. They say it helps them focus on high-risk individuals who might otherwise slip through the cracks.
However, civil liberties groups like Big Brother Watch are raising alarms. They argue that this tech could turn everyone into walking ID cards and expand the surveillance state. They’re concerned about privacy and the potential for misidentification.
One case involves Shaun Thompson, who was wrongly flagged as a suspect and held by police for nearly 30 minutes, despite showing multiple forms of ID. He’s now part of a legal claim against the Met Police.
While facial recognition tech has improved, studies show it still has a higher error rate for people with darker skin tones, raising concerns about racial bias.
Moreover, there are worries about how long innocent people’s images are kept on police databases, even after they’ve been cleared of any wrongdoing.
Despite claims of public support for LFR, a community impact assessment revealed minimal consultation with residents, leading to skepticism about its acceptance.
Recently, Sir Keir Starmer suggested expanding facial recognition tech to help tackle violence, which has alarmed 27 campaign groups. They sent a letter to the Prime Minister urging him to reconsider this approach.
In Scotland, there’s also pushback against proposals to use LFR, with questions about whether proper legal advice has been sought. Critics argue that any major changes in police practices should involve public debate and a clear legal basis.
In the end, the debate continues: is this technology a necessary tool for safety, or does it infringe on our rights? Only time will tell.