Facial Recognition Use and Related Documentation

Fred made this Freedom of Information request to West Mercia Police Automatic anti-spam measures are in place for this older request. Please let us know if a further response is expected or if you are having trouble responding.

The request was partially successful.

Dear West Mercia Police,

Please could you confirm if the force is using live and/or retrospective facial recognition technology, or is planning to in the next 12 months?

If you are using facial recognition, which supplier(s) have you contracted with?

Please share copies of your policy, standard operating procedure and DPIA along with any other related documentation.

My full name is Fred Wright

Yours faithfully,

Fred

Information Compliance,

Dear Mr Wright

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO:  174439

 

Thank you for your request for information which was received on 25^th May
2022.  Your request will now be considered in accordance with the Freedom
of Information Act 2000 (“the Act”).

 

We will aim to provide a response to your request within 20 working days
as stipulated by the Act.  Delays happen on occasion but if this is the
case you will be kept up to date.

 

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Sue Cale
Information Compliance Assistant | Information Compliance Unit  | West
Mercia Police

Hindlip Hall Police Headquarters, Hindlip Hall, Worcester, WR3 8SP
Direct Dial: 01905 331545 Ext: 7772545

Team email: [1][email address]

 

 

 

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Information Compliance,

Dear Mr Wright

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO:  174439

 

With reference to your request for information which was received on 25^th
May 2022.

 

I apologise for the delay in responding to your FOI request and for any
inconvenience caused.  Every effort is being made to process requests
within statutory deadlines but delays have on occasion been unavoidable. 
We will provide you with a response to your request as soon as is
practicable.

 

Please advise us if you no longer require this information.

 

Your complaint rights are outlined below should you be unsatisfied.

 

 

Kind regards

 

Sue Cale

Information Compliance Assistant | Information Compliance Unit  

 

 

 

West Mercia Police in complying with their statutory duty under sections 1
and 11 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed
information will not breach the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. 
However, the rights of the copyright owner of the enclosed information
will continue to be protected by law.  Applications for the copyright
owner’s written permission to reproduce any part of the attached
information should be addressed to The Force Solicitor, West Mercia Police
Headquarters, PO Box 55, Hindlip, Worcester, WR3 8SP.

 

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

 

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?  You have the right to require West Mercia Police
(WMP) to review their decision.

 

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the person that dealt with your request.

 

Ask to have the decision looked at again.  The quickest and easiest way to
have the decision looked at again is to telephone the person named at the
end of your decision letter.  That person will be able to discuss the
decision, explain any issues and assist with any problems.

 

Complaint

 

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
WMP made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information, you can lodge a complaint with WMP to have the
decision reviewed.  WMP must be notified of your intention to complain
within 40 working days of the date of its response to your Freedom of
Information request.  Complaints should be made in writing and addressed
to:

 

Information Compliance Unit

West Mercia Police Headquarters

PO Box 55

Hindlip Hall

Hindlip

Worcester

WR3 8SP

 

Alternatively, you can email [1][email address]

 

In all possible circumstances, WMP will aim to respond to your complaint
within 20 working days.

 

The Information Commissioner

 

If after lodging a complaint with WMP you are still dissatisfied with the
decision, you may make application to the Information Commissioner (ICO)
for a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with
in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

 

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their [2]website.  Alternatively, you can contact the ICO in
writing or via phone:

 

Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

 

Tel:  0303 123 1113 (local rate) or 01625 545745 (national rate)

Fax:  01625 524 510

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. https://ico.org.uk/

Information Compliance,

Dear Mr Wright

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: 174439

 

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
on 25^th May 2022. Please find below the response to your request:

 

Please could you confirm if the force is using live and/or retrospective
facial recognition technology, or is planning to in the next 12 months?

 

If you are using facial recognition, which supplier(s) have you contracted
with?

 

Please share copies of your policy, standard operating procedure and DPIA
along with any other related documentation.

 

 

Reply

 

Please could you confirm if the force is using live and/or retrospective
facial recognition technology, or is planning to in the next 12 months?

Within West Mercia we have the capability to complete Facial Recognition
searches within the Police National Database (PND)

 

If you are using facial recognition, which supplier(s) have you contracted
with?

 

No information held – this information would be held by the Home Office
rather than West Mercia Police

 

Please share copies of your policy, standard operating procedure and DPIA
along with any other related documentation.

 

No information held - This is a National system and as such any such
documentation would be managed at a National level rather than West Mercia
Police

 

 

 

Your attention is drawn to the below which details your right of
complaint.

 

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
contact the Information Compliance Unit quoting the reference number
above.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

S Biddle
Information Compliance Officer | Information Compliance Unit  | West
Mercia Police

Hindlip Hall Police Headquarters, Hindlip Hall, Worcester, WR3 8SP
Direct Dial: 01905 331565 Ext. 7772565

Team email: [1][email address]

 

 

 

 

West Mercia Police in complying with their statutory duty under sections 1
and 11 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed
information will not breach the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
However, the rights of the copyright owner of the enclosed information
will continue to be protected by law. Applications for the copyright
owner’s written permission to reproduce any part of the attached
information should be addressed to The Force Solicitor, West Mercia Police
Headquarters, PO Box 55, Hindlip, Worcester, WR3 8SP.

 

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

 

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect? You have the right to require West Mercia Police
(WMP) to review their decision.

 

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the person that dealt with your request.

 

Ask to have the decision looked at again. The quickest and easiest way to
have the decision looked at again is to telephone the person named at the
end of your decision letter. That person will be able to discuss the
decision, explain any issues and assist with any problems.

 

Complaint

 

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
WMP made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information, you can lodge a complaint with WMP to have the
decision reviewed. WMP must be notified of your intention to complain
within 40 working days of the date of its response to your Freedom of
Information request. Complaints should be made in writing and addressed
to:

 

Information Compliance Unit

West Mercia Police Headquarters

PO Box 55

Hindlip Hall

Hindlip

Worcester

WR3 8SP

 

Alternatively, you can email [2][email address]

 

In all possible circumstances, WMP will aim to respond to your complaint
within 20 working days.

 

The Information Commissioner

 

If after lodging a complaint with WMP you are still dissatisfied with the
decision, you may make application to the Information Commissioner (ICO)
for a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with
in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

 

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their [3]website. Alternatively, you can contact the ICO in
writing or via phone:

 

Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

 

Tel: 0303 123 1113 (local rate) or 01625 545745 (national rate)

Fax: 01625 524 510

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[email address]
3. https://ico.org.uk/

J Roberts left an annotation ()

Clearview - a company used by the police - fined more than £7.5m in respect of its database that matches facial images - May '22

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

Biometrics Commissioner - 16/2/23

The use of overt surveillance camera systems in public places by police forces in England and Wales: An assessment of compliance with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice

'8. Not all respondents have completed data protection impact assessments for all the technology under discussion in this survey. This is a concern, particularly given the government’s position that much of the work currently undertaken by the Surveillance Camera Commissioner is a data protection issue, and already falls under the remit of the ICO notwithstanding any legislative proposals to abolished (sic) the Surveillance Camera Code by the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill.'

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicatio...

Commissioner for the Retention and Use of Biometric Material Annual Report - January 2021 – March 2022

And

Surveillance Camera Commissioner Annual Report March 2021 – March 2022

February 2023

'84. More worrying is the reported use of images of people who, while having been arrested, have never subsequently been charged or summonsed, for comparison against Live Facial Recognition ‘reads‘ and watchlists. As I record in Part 2 of this report, the use of facial recognition technology by the police has become one of the most contentious areas of biometric surveillance, not just in the UK but globally .

Part 2 – Facial Recognition and AI

96. The objective of the event was to gain a better understanding of how facial recognition technology is perceived by society in a policing and law enforcement context. Speaking at the event were the Forensic Science Regulator, a senior lecturer from Sheffield University and representatives from the Biometrics Institute, the Information Commissioner’s Office, South Wales Police, and Big Brother Watch.

Appendix F: Facial recognition and AI'

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk...

Initial analysis of the 2022 police survey returns
Published 14 November 2022

Is your force operating Facial Recognition Technology?

'Only one force stated that it was using LFR (from the list supplied). Six had access to PND and two of those to CAID. One other mentioned access to Athena.'

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicatio...

Live facial recognition technology guidance published
22/3/22

https://www.college.police.uk/article/li...

The Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner's response to the College of Policing APP on Live Facial Recognition - 6/4/22

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-b...

Chief Constables’ Council

Title: National Biometrics Function and National Facial Recognition Project - 30/9/21

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/8...

Who's Watching You? Report by Big Brother Watch - 7/2/22

https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-conten...

'Police forces were reluctant to answer questions about any advanced capabilities, while some refused to say if they used Chinese brands at all'

Biometrics Commissioner - 15/2/23

UK policing 'shot through' with Chinese surveillance technology

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-po...

Update (21/3/23):

'We note that the survey returns gave the impression that 2 forces were using Hikvision body worn cameras. However, subsequent enquiries have shown that to be incorrect. Consequently, the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner can report that none of the forces who replied to the survey used body worn cameras manufactured by Hikvision.'

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-po...

'A Mail on Sunday investigation discovered CCTV cameras – which have also been banned by the US military amid concerns they could be used to send vital data back to Beijing's spies – at numerous military sites, including barracks for elite troops who guard the King.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...

Fact Sheet on live facial recognition used by police Home Office 2019

https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov....

West Midlands Police trialling live-stream body-cams

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/w...

Baross Goldie 'answered' this question from Lord Alton of Liverpool:

UIN HL5880

'To ask His Majesty's Government why CCTV cameras made by Hikvision and Dahua have not yet been removed from UK army bases, following the direction to do so by the Ministry of Defence in November 2021.'

https://questions-statements.parliament....

Daily Express 4/5/23:
New security threat as GCHQ offices exposed as using Chinese-made CCTV cameras

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/...

Data Protection Impact Assessment Report

J Roberts left an annotation ()

Gov.uk 30/10/23

'A new report points to a ‘worrying vacuum’ in government plans to safeguard the public in relation to biometrics and surveillance.'

CRISP

INDEPENDENT REPORT ON CHANGES TO THE FUNCTIONS OF THE BIOMETRICS AND SURVEILLANCE CAMERA COMMISSIONER ARISING FROM THE DATA PROTECTION AND DIGITAL INFORMATION (No.2) BILL

'Facial recognition is one of many evolving surveillance capabilities...' (p42)

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/repor...

Fraser Sampson, the biometrics and surveillance commissioner, expresses concern over the use of Chinese made cameras in policing in an exclusive Guardian interview (29/10/23):

“If I was a sworn police officer and the Home Office gave me body-worn video made by one of these companies, I would refuse to wear it on the basis that it was incompatible with my oath of office, and I would look forward to appearing before a conduct panel to explain why.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023...

The Guardian 29/10/23:

'Police are being encouraged to double their use of retrospective facial recognition software to track down offenders over the next six months.'

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2...
The Guardian 23/10/23:

'Hikvision, the Chinese surveillance firm identified by the UK government as a security threat, has “recommitted” to Britain after receiving clarification that a ban on its cameras being positioned at sensitive sites does not extend to public authorities or police stations.'

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023...

Clearview AI Inc v The Information Commissioner [2023] UKFTT 819 (GRC)

17/10/23

1. We have concluded that the Information Commissioner (“the Commissioner”) did not have jurisdiction to issue the Enforcement Notice and the Monetary Penalty Notice to Clearview AI Inc (referred to herein as “CV”) because although the processing undertaken by CV was related to the monitoring of data subjects’ behaviour in the United Kingdom, the processing is beyond the material scope of the GDPR and is not relevant processing for the purposes of Article 3 UK GDPR.

13. ...CV further submits that the Service is an Internet Search
Engine service which is offered exclusively to foreign (i.e. non-UK/EU) criminal law enforcement and national security agencies, and their contractors...

40. CV’s Database contains billions of images. The size grows according to the number of images copied by the scrapers. In October 2022 it was estimated that the Database included over 20 billion images and increasing as new images are scraped. We were provided with an estimate of a growth rate of 75 million images per day.

62. CV offered its Service on a trial basis to law enforcement/government organisations within the UK between June 2019 and March 2020. There were 721 searches made in that trial phase. This “UK Test Phase” took place before the end of the transition period associated with the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. There is no suggestion that the Service has been offered to customers established within the UK since that time.

63. The UK Test Phase is not relied upon by the Commissioner as part of the alleged infringements but as an indication that there are images of UK residents held within the CV Database...

115. The heart of this case, in the Commissioner’s submissions, is that the Service is being used to monitor the behaviour of data subjects. If we are not satisfied about that his case will fail, therefore we consider that aspect first.

144. For all of these reasons we find that that CV’s processing is related to the monitoring carried out by the clients because...

https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/...

Panopticon:

https://panopticonblog.com/2023/10/18/cl...

J Roberts left an annotation ()

17/11/23

'Information Commissioner seeks permission to appeal Clearview AI Inc ruling

The UK Information Commissioner is seeking permission to appeal the judgment of the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights) (Tribunal) on Clearview AI Inc (Clearview).

In its judgment the Tribunal supported the ICO's view that US-based Clearview was processing personal information, which related to the monitoring of individual’s behaviour through the collection of billions of facial images, which were then offered for access and analysis using AI, to foreign subscribers.

The Commissioner welcomes this important clarification regarding UK data protection legislation as it provides certainty for businesses who are carrying out or planning to carry out similar activities.

The ruling makes clear that even if a company is not established in the UK, it is subject to UK data protection law that is related to the monitoring of people living in the UK. As such, where Clearview provides its services commercially, it will be subject to the ICO's jurisdiction.

The Commissioner considers the Tribunal incorrectly interpreted the law when finding Clearview’s processing fell outside the reach of UK data protection law on the basis that it provided its services to foreign law enforcement agencies. The Commissioner's view is that Clearview itself was not processing for foreign law enforcement purposes and should not be shielded from the scope of UK law on that basis.

John Edwards, UK Information Commissioner, said...'

https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/media-c...