In his final annual report, the U.K.'s outgoing biometrics and surveillance commissioner, Dr. Fraser Sampson, highlighted ethical and technical shortcomings in the government's approach to technology. He expressed concern over the proposed abolition of the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice as part of the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill, as this could create vulnerabilities for users and increase regulatory complexity.
Dr. Sampson also raised issues regarding the system that empowers chief police officers and others to make National Security Determinations for the retention of biometric material. He noted significant IT issues that have persisted, leading to inaccuracies in the National Security Determination process. This lack of accuracy not only undermines public trust but also poses challenges to the accountability framework.
While Dr. Sampson supports the appropriate use of facial matching and other emerging biometrics, he emphasizes the need for a robust accountability framework that keeps pace with technological advancements. However, he raises concerns about the potential jeopardization of this accountability.
These concerns are not limited to Dr. Sampson alone. Members of the House of Lords recently wrote to the home secretary, highlighting the lack of a legal basis for the use of live facial recognition technology and calling for legislation. They expressed worry about the speed at which this technology is being applied in the country compared to other democratic states and stressed the need for clear laws, independent scrutiny, and consistent training and use of live facial recognition technology across England and Wales.
It is worth noting that the role of the biometrics and surveillance camera commissioner is set to disappear with the introduction of the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill. Dr. Sampson expressed his frustration with the lack of engagement and support from the government, stating that he often faced resource constraints and uncertainty regarding the future of the office.
As we anticipate the new legislation, it is crucial to address the concerns raised by Dr. Sampson and the House of Lords. While technology continues to evolve rapidly, regulatory measures must be future-proofed to ensure the appropriate and responsible use of biometrics and surveillance systems. Independent scrutiny, a solid legal foundation, and consistency across the country are vital for safeguarding public trust and maintaining a fair and accountable system.
