Privacy, crime control and police use of automated facial recognition technology

Joe Purshouse, Liz Campbell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

This paper discusses the police use of automated facial recognition technology (FRT) as a tool of crime control and public space surveillance. It considers the legality of the police use of FRT in England and Wales, with particular reference to the fundamental rights of those who have been subject to criminal process. Drawing on relevant privacy and criminal law scholarship, this paper argues that inadequate protection has been afforded to the privacy rights, and other human rights of those subject to police FRT surveillance in public spaces in England and Wales. We therefore suggest that, if FRT is to be deployed in future, a narrower and more prescribed legal framework is necessary.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)188-204
Number of pages17
JournalCriminal Law Review
Volume3
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Keywords

  • crime prevention
  • discrimination
  • facial recognition software
  • human rights
  • police powers and duties
  • prescribed by law
  • proportionality
  • right to respect for private and family life

Cite this

@article{95a3cbab766a421a8fd14fd2366a3b37,
title = "Privacy, crime control and police use of automated facial recognition technology",
abstract = "This paper discusses the police use of automated facial recognition technology (FRT) as a tool of crime control and public space surveillance. It considers the legality of the police use of FRT in England and Wales, with particular reference to the fundamental rights of those who have been subject to criminal process. Drawing on relevant privacy and criminal law scholarship, this paper argues that inadequate protection has been afforded to the privacy rights, and other human rights of those subject to police FRT surveillance in public spaces in England and Wales. We therefore suggest that, if FRT is to be deployed in future, a narrower and more prescribed legal framework is necessary.",
keywords = "crime prevention, discrimination, facial recognition software, human rights, police powers and duties, prescribed by law, proportionality, right to respect for private and family life",
author = "Joe Purshouse and Liz Campbell",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
volume = "3",
pages = "188--204",
journal = "Criminal Law Review",
issn = "0011-135X",
publisher = "Sweet & Maxwell",

}

Privacy, crime control and police use of automated facial recognition technology. / Purshouse, Joe; Campbell, Liz.

In: Criminal Law Review, Vol. 3, 2019, p. 188-204.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Privacy, crime control and police use of automated facial recognition technology

AU - Purshouse, Joe

AU - Campbell, Liz

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - This paper discusses the police use of automated facial recognition technology (FRT) as a tool of crime control and public space surveillance. It considers the legality of the police use of FRT in England and Wales, with particular reference to the fundamental rights of those who have been subject to criminal process. Drawing on relevant privacy and criminal law scholarship, this paper argues that inadequate protection has been afforded to the privacy rights, and other human rights of those subject to police FRT surveillance in public spaces in England and Wales. We therefore suggest that, if FRT is to be deployed in future, a narrower and more prescribed legal framework is necessary.

AB - This paper discusses the police use of automated facial recognition technology (FRT) as a tool of crime control and public space surveillance. It considers the legality of the police use of FRT in England and Wales, with particular reference to the fundamental rights of those who have been subject to criminal process. Drawing on relevant privacy and criminal law scholarship, this paper argues that inadequate protection has been afforded to the privacy rights, and other human rights of those subject to police FRT surveillance in public spaces in England and Wales. We therefore suggest that, if FRT is to be deployed in future, a narrower and more prescribed legal framework is necessary.

KW - crime prevention

KW - discrimination

KW - facial recognition software

KW - human rights

KW - police powers and duties

KW - prescribed by law

KW - proportionality

KW - right to respect for private and family life

M3 - Article

VL - 3

SP - 188

EP - 204

JO - Criminal Law Review

JF - Criminal Law Review

SN - 0011-135X

ER -