[Yanika Galea]

Facial recognition technology (FRT), have a wider implementation by the law enforcement agencies worldwide. The MET has been surveying the crowd with live facial recognition (LRF) since August of 2016 when at first it was used for the Nothing hill carnival. From then, it has been managing in another 10 trials, this includes Leicester Square, Westfield Stratford, and Whitehall during the 2017 Remembrance Sunday commemorations. In a recent update report, it is facing the concerns over the accuracy, privacy, and ethical implications.

The report shows the percentage of 81% of the suspects indicated by the Met’s FRT were innocent. They will raise a highly demanding error rates about the reliability of the technology and its broader societal impacts. The system of recognition scans the public in real time, and it is used to compare faces, generally for wanted people for specific crimes. However, due to an error only 8 out of 42 matches were verified as correct and 4 out of 42 were never found due to being lost into the crowd. The MET would prefer to measure accuracy by comparing successful and unsuccessful matches, as stated to this metric the error rate was just 0.1%.

The incorrect percentage and inaccuracy have raised criticism from human rights advocates, arguing that such errors are extremely immensely impact minorities and disempower communities. With several studies it’s more likely to misidentify individuals with darker skin tones, woman and younger people, a fact that aggravating concerns about racial profiling and discriminatory policing. The MET, like other law enforcement agencies, contend that FRT is a valuable tool for crime prevention and safety however from the reports it shows that technology may not be effective as advertised which leads to wrongful stops, invasive questioning, and unnecessary surveillance of innocent people and this could lead to erode public trust in both police and the technology itself.

In my opinion, this report underscores the need for more restrained and transparent approach to FRT, especially within Law Enforcement. Moreover, as these inordinately impact marginalized groups, it seems clear that FRT in its current state is not ready for widespread deployment in sensitive context. Until technology companies and law enforcement agencies can improve accuracy and address deep-rooted biases, FRT should be used discreet, with strict regulations in place to protect individuals’ privacy rights and prevent dissipate. This perspective emphasizes both the word of honor and the problems of the FRT, while support for a balanced, rights-respecting approach to its use.

[Tutor]

Posts