A ‘discussion paper’ outlining a range of considerations for the potential use of live facial recognition technology by police in Scotland has been published by the Scottish Police Authority.
The 23-page document was released by the SPA as a follow-up to its ‘national conversation’ it initiated last year as part of a wider debate on the increased use of biometrics technology in law enforcement.
Launched in conjunction with Police Scotland and the Scottish Biometrics Commissioner, the new paper aims to understand the public and key stakeholders’ views on the possible adoption of LFR in Scotland in ‘certain circumstances’.
“These views are sought prior to any decision being made on whether Police Scotland expend resources on exploring LFR in detail,” the paper said.
The ‘tripartite’ group will be aiming to produce videos to support the discussion on the technology, and to gain ‘initial insights from the wider public as to their views on the use of LFR by Police Scotland’.
‘The evidence gathered from the national conversation will be used to inform a position how Police Scotland may or may not proceed in exploring the use of LFR,’ the paper said.
Brian Plastow, Scottish Biometrics Commissioner, told Futurescot: “As we have seen from previous experience, when Police Scotland has adopted a ‘technology first approach’ (as happened with cyber kiosks) without consulting to develop policy and practice it can go wrong and undermine public (and political) confidence and trust. So, it’s great that Police Scotland and the SPA are now following the ‘Three Laws of Biometrics’ developed by the global Biometrics Institute where policy and process come first, and technology comes last.”
In 2022, the Scottish Biometrics Commissioner commissioned a report into public attitudes on the police use of biometric data. Though not specifically relating to LFR, this report found 66% agreed that police should use facial recognition technology in public spaces to identify those wanted by the police. The authority has commissioned further polling to provide an update to this polling, however the results of this polling are not available at time of writing, the paper said.
‘Further polling has included trend analysis to determine the Scottish public’s perception on the use of technology. Of particular relevance is that more people feel the benefits outweigh the risks in regards to ‘Facial recognition computers which can learn identities through CCTV video to catch criminals’ compared to those who feel the risks outweigh the benefits. This saw a decline from 32% in 2020 to 20% in 2022. However, 75% of respondents were in favour of police adopting LFR.’
The paper sets out some of the benefits and limitations of the technology. The benefits include officers being able to identify suspects more quickly, freeing up time and resource for other deployments. It has been argued that LFR can provide a deterrent to criminal activity and also enhance protections for vulnerable people.
On the other hand, concerns around the use of LFR in policing have centred on the capabilities of the technology, the legal framework and the disproportionate impact of LFR on the right to privacy.
Deployments of the technology, which can identify known or wanted suspects in public places, have been carried out in London and South Wales. It is typically deployed using vans with LFR cameras, with clear signage on both the vans and throughout the area to advise the public that LFR is in operation.
A review of LFR usage by Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) found that between January and June 2024, 500 hours of surveillance footage was captured. Further analysis of the 79 deployments conducted in this timeframe found that police stopped one person every 55 minutes, with an arrest every 128 minutes. The review, conducted by Stopwatch, concluded that there was limited evidence of the efficacy of LFR.
Big Brother Watch has published findings raising concerns around the accuracy of LFR. Published in 2018, this report found that the use of LFR by MPS has a 98% accuracy rate, and that South Wales Police (SWP) LFR has a 91% accuracy rate. However, the Biometrics Institute concluded that there was insufficient data in this report to assess the accuracy of LFR.
Quality of custody images, recently highlighted by the Scottish Biometrics Commissioner, is also a factor that might limit the efficacy of the technology, the paper notes.
To read the paper in full, click here.