Millions of custody images that were unlawfully kept could still be in use for facial recognition by police in the UK. This concern comes from Tony Eastaugh, the biometric commissioner for England and Wales, who has warned about the rapid growth of surveillance tools in policing.
Back in 2012, a High Court made it clear that keeping images of arrested individuals who were not convicted was unlawful. The ruling pointed out that treating information about innocent people the same as that of convicted criminals was unfair, and keeping those images for six years was excessive. Yet, Eastaugh’s recent report showed that police forces still hang onto images of many who have been arrested but never charged. The report notes that while there’s work underway to manage this properly, the use of these images for facial recognition remains a concern.
Earlier this year, a former biometrics commissioner estimated that there are likely several million of these unlawfully retained images in police databases. In November 2023, the National Police Chief’s Council revealed they had launched a program to make sure police are consistent in how they handle these images, focusing particularly on their use in facial recognition.
The police acknowledge that custody images are a crucial tool for investigators, but they emphasize the need for transparency and legitimacy in their use. This new national program aims to establish strict management rules to ensure that the retention and use of data adhere to laws and policies, which is key for public trust.
As the biometrics commissioner, Eastaugh oversees how police collect and use various biometric data, including facial images. This role was created following a decision to merge two positions, leading to his appointment in December 2023.
The issue of custody image retention has been brought up repeatedly in recent years. Both Eastaugh’s predecessor and the former commissioner before him urged Parliament to create explicit laws governing biometric technologies to clarify how police use sensitive information. In a parliamentary hearing, Sampson pointed out that even after the High Court’s ruling, progress on deleting these images has stalled because the database lacks the ability to delete records in bulk.
Lee Freeman, leading the NPCC’s record management, noted in a letter that holding an estimated 19 million potentially unlawful images poses significant risks related to police legitimacy and public support.
This issue isn’t just about unlawful retention; the annual report also raises alarms about trust and accountability as biometric and surveillance technologies grow. The report mentions the emergence of new biometric methods, such as voice patterns and gait, alongside traditional tools like automatic number plate recognition (ANPR), which are now being used in ways not originally intended.
Sampson previously highlighted the “mission creep” associated with ANPR, where it’s capable of collecting more data than just vehicle information, raising concerns about privacy and monitoring behavior.
Eastaugh stressed that as these technologies evolve, having clear processes and regulations is crucial. He urged for stronger legal, ethical, and societal frameworks around their use, emphasizing the need for greater engagement with stakeholders to bolster public confidence.
Despite repeated calls from Parliament and civil society for new laws governing facial recognition technology, the Home Office and police have insisted there is already a comprehensive legal framework in place, citing various acts and laws that they believe regulate their practices adequately.
