The Ada Lovelace Institute (ALI) critiques the UK's inadequate regulation of biometric surveillance technologies, highlighting the risks to fundamental rights and public trust. Their analysis revealed significant gaps in governance, particularly regarding live facial recognition (LFR), which is currently the most regulated biometrics application. ALI calls for legal clarity and comprehensive governance for various biometric systems, encompassing not only LFR but also technologies such as fingerprints and emotion recognition. The urgency for better regulation is emphasized, especially for private sector uses that remain less scrutinized.
The UK’s patchwork approach to regulating biometric surveillance technologies is inadequate, placing fundamental rights at risk and undermining public trust, as per the ALI.
The analysis by the Ada Lovelace Institute found significant gaps and fragmentation in existing governance frameworks for biometric tools, failing to adequately protect people's rights.
Our legal analysis shows that the UK's current ‘diffused’ governance model fails to ensure the proportional, accountable, and ethical use of biometrics.
Police use of LFR is the most highly governed biometric application in the UK, yet it does not meet the bar of a 'sufficient legal framework'.
Collection
[
|
...
]