Lawyer Monthly Magazine - July 2019 Edition

recognition during threatening events. In Annapolis Maryland when a suspect refused to cooperate with police and be identified with their fingerprints, FRT came into play. With Maryland being one of the most aggressive states when it comes to facial recognition, it is no surprise they opted for it to help them with their investigation. As Anne Arundel County Police Chief Timothy Altomare said: “We would have been much longer in identifying him and being able to push forward in the investigation without that system.” But after UK’s Ed Bridges decided to seek legal action, Megan Goulding, a lawyer from the civil liberties group Liberty which is supporting Bridges in his claim, stated that using FRT is: “just like taking people’s DNA or fingerprints, without their knowledge or their consent.”. In order to scan the suspect’s face in Maryland, the police needed to use their ‘exclusive’ access to “three million state mug shots, seven million state driver’s license photos and an additional 24.9 million mug shots from a national FBI database”, and it is not clear to how many other people or agencies have access to this same information. If we were to push aside our worry that anyone could potentially hack or scam their way in to gain access to such data, we must at least give our time to question how we feel about scanners taking our photos when we are merely going for a stroll. When the MET police trialled the above in London, not everyone was happy; three arrests were made alone on one day alone, and one man was fined £90 for a public order offence, after arguing his right to cover his face in order to avoid the cameras. When does it switch from trying to maintain your personal privacy, to refusing to cooperate with authorities? It is a fine line in play here. And privacy is one aspect, but Liberty states, and we can argue that the aforementioned gentleman would probably agree, that the tech breaches our freedom of expression. IS FACIAL RECOGNITION A VIOLATION OF OUR PRIVACY? Written By Jaya Harrar WHY ARE THE POLICE USING FRT? FRT sounds like every Crimewatcher’s dream. This piece of tech is supposedly more effective than CCTV as the camera creates a biometric map of the face it has captured, creating a unique code which distinguishes that particular face. In short, police can use these images of passers-by to see if they match anyone on their watch lists. Handy, huh? Merely understanding the basic form of how this sophisticated tech works almost makes you feel so much safer. The tool allows the police force to scan busy crowds in shopping centres or concerts to omit risk and potential danger. And many agree. Speaking to the BBC, Chris Phillips, Former Head of the National Counter Terrorism Security Office, said: “If there are hundreds of people walking the streets who should be in prison because there are outstanding warrants for their arrest, or dangerous criminals bent on harming others in public places, the proper use of AFR [automated facial recognition] has a vital policing role.” However, Ed Bridges, an office worker simply trying to peacefully purchase a sandwich for lunch has questioned this and states that it is a violation of privacy, a breach of human rights, data protection and equality laws. DOES FRT VIOLATE OUR PRIVACY? Some would strongly argue so. San Francisco for starters: earlier last month the hub for tech revolution became the first city to ban the use of FRT by police and other agencies. Why? Some fear FRT is the first phase of pushing the US to a Big Brother era, enforcing a more oppressive surveillance state. However, other states have witnessed the advantages of facial Like any other technological advancement, facial recognition technology (FRT) has its benefits. Whilst there are clear advantages to such developments that seem almost too futuristic for 2019, there is usually a caveat at hand with an array of TBD answers to much pressing questions prior to it being fully adopted and welcomed into civilisation. Especially, if it is in the hands of authority. And FRT is no exception. In fact, it has barely yet made its national debut into society before someone decided to legally challenge its use. Three major police forces in the UK - Leicestershire Police, Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police, have actually been trialling the tech out for a few years now, but it hasn’t been without criticism. Now, it is under scrutiny in court for breaching human rights. But, why?