West Yorkshire Police are trialling new technology which sees suspects having their fingerprints scanned and processed by a mobile app. Using portable scanners connected to officer’s phones, the apps run the results by the IDENT1 and IABS (Immigration and Asylum Biometric System) biometric databases and check for matches, allowing for fast, on-the-spot identification of detainees. The Home Office says that this will allow forces to significantly reduce the time spent processing suspects, allowing for officers to return to active duty more quickly. But the technology, which the Home Office expects to be adopted by 20 forces across the UK by the end of the year, has raised questions about citizen’s consent and legal advice. Nick Hurd, Minister for Policing and the Fire Service says that the proposal is one of the many schemes the Home Office is running in order to better arm the forces with information at crime scenes. "By cutting out unnecessary trips to and from the police station, mobile technology is really helping to save valuable time and allowing officers to do what they do best - cutting crime and keeping us safe." The Home Office says that the system can return results in under a minute. In an earlier trial, the system saw an armed response unit able to identify a suspect who'd given false details as a disqualified driver. The unit was then able to arrest the man for three offences, seize the vehicle and return to patrol ten minutes later. The new system, which sees officer's phones handling all of the communications processes, is also said to be about one tenth the cost of portable fingerprint scanners distributed under the old Project Midas scheme. Emma Norton, head of legal casework for human rights campaigners Liberty, has branded the scheme "breathtakingly invasive", highlighting the lack of a discussion on citizens' rights. "This scheme is part of a pattern of the police using radical privacy-invading technology without proper public consultation or meaningful parliamentary oversight," Norton said. "There is no discussion of consent. Or of the importance of legal advice before people should be asked to hand over this kind of information about themselves. Or what may happen if someone declines a request. Or of what will be done with it - including the fact that it will be shared with the Home Office to target undocumented migrants." The Home Office says that fingerprints are not stored by the system and scans will be automatically deleted once they have been checked, match or no match. It's unclear if refusing to consent to your fingerprints being scanned could see you charged under Section 89 (2) of the Police Act 1996 - "Any person who resists or wilfully obstructs a constable in the execution of his duty shall be guilty..." - but the government's own guidance page says nothing specifically about an officer's ability to force you to have your prints scanned.
Wir nutzen Cookies auf unserer Website. Einige von ihnen sind essenziell für den Betrieb der Seite, während andere uns helfen, diese Website und die Nutzererfahrung zu verbessern (Tracking Cookies). Sie können selbst entscheiden, ob Sie die Cookies zulassen möchten. Bitte beachten Sie, dass bei einer Ablehnung womöglich nicht mehr alle Funktionalitäten der Seite zur Verfügung stehen.
West Yorkshire Police are trialling new technology which sees suspects having their fingerprints scanned and processed by a mobile app. Using portable scanners connected to officer’s phones, the apps run the results by the IDENT1 and IABS (Immigration and Asylum Biometric System) biometric databases and check for matches, allowing for fast, on-the-spot identification of detainees. The Home Office says that this will allow forces to significantly reduce the time spent processing suspects, allowing for officers to return to active duty more quickly. But the technology, which the Home Office expects to be adopted by 20 forces across the UK by the end of the year, has raised questions about citizen’s consent and legal advice. Nick Hurd, Minister for Policing and the Fire Service says that the proposal is one of the many schemes the Home Office is running in order to better arm the forces with information at crime scenes. "By cutting out unnecessary trips to and from the police station, mobile technology is really helping to save valuable time and allowing officers to do what they do best - cutting crime and keeping us safe." The Home Office says that the system can return results in under a minute. In an earlier trial, the system saw an armed response unit able to identify a suspect who'd given false details as a disqualified driver. The unit was then able to arrest the man for three offences, seize the vehicle and return to patrol ten minutes later. The new system, which sees officer's phones handling all of the communications processes, is also said to be about one tenth the cost of portable fingerprint scanners distributed under the old Project Midas scheme. Emma Norton, head of legal casework for human rights campaigners Liberty, has branded the scheme "breathtakingly invasive", highlighting the lack of a discussion on citizens' rights. "This scheme is part of a pattern of the police using radical privacy-invading technology without proper public consultation or meaningful parliamentary oversight," Norton said. "There is no discussion of consent. Or of the importance of legal advice before people should be asked to hand over this kind of information about themselves. Or what may happen if someone declines a request. Or of what will be done with it - including the fact that it will be shared with the Home Office to target undocumented migrants." The Home Office says that fingerprints are not stored by the system and scans will be automatically deleted once they have been checked, match or no match. It's unclear if refusing to consent to your fingerprints being scanned could see you charged under Section 89 (2) of the Police Act 1996 - "Any person who resists or wilfully obstructs a constable in the execution of his duty shall be guilty..." - but the government's own guidance page says nothing specifically about an officer's ability to force you to have your prints scanned.