19 August 2018

London’s Met Police facial recognition trial proves to be a farce

THE METROPOLITAN POLICE’S controversial facial recognition trial has proved fruitless, with the force revealing it has resulted in no arrests.

The equipment was positioned on a prominent pedestrian bridge in a bid to identify criminals using autonomous technology.

Critics asked the Met not to use it and cited human rights laws, believing the use of facial recognition systems constituted an invasion of privacy. But the police went on using the system regardless.

However, it didn’t prove to be a particularly useful crime-fighting tool, as Scotland Yard noted the system didn’t contribute to a single arrest, although it remained tight-lipped on how many people were flagged for questioning.

“This deployment formed an important part of ongoing trials and a full review of its use will take place once they have been completed,” explained Detective Superintendent Bernie Galopin.

“It is important to note all the faces on the watch list used during the deployment were of people wanted by the Met and the courts for violence-related offences."

“If the technology generated an alert to signal a match, police officers on the ground reviewed the alert and carried out further checks to confirm the identity of the individual. All alerts against the watchlist will be deleted after 30 days and faces in the database that did not generate an alert were deleted immediately.”

Scotland Yard said the Stratford operation would be ‘overt’, with police informing passers-by of the  cameras’ presence, both audibly and with leaflets. But that would require busy Londoners to actually notice the signs.

Meanwhile privacy activists, including the advocacy group Liberty, have denounced the scheme, with some dubbing it “staggeringly inaccurate”.

It’s not hard to see why activists are so vehemently opposed. In May, it was found that a shocking 98% of the Met’s facial recognition technology was inaccurate. Not only would this serve to embroil innocent people in criminal cases, but it could lead police to prematurely relinquish dangerous suspects.

Even when the false positives are omitted from the system, the ethical dilemma endures.

Source: Computer Shopper, Issue 368.

No comments: