Millions of unlawfully retained custody images held by UK police, including those of individuals who were never convicted, continue to raise concerns about their use in facial-recognition technologies. This issue stems from a 2012 High Court ruling that deemed the practice unlawful, citing disproportionate retention periods and equal treatment of convicted and unconvicted individuals.
Despite this ruling, recent reports show that these images remain in use, highlighting gaps in adherence to legal and ethical standards. Efforts to address the problem are underway, but significant challenges remain.
Estimates from early 2023 indicate that several million custody images are unlawfully stored in the Police National Database (PND), which is hindered by a lack of bulk deletion capabilities. A national programme, launched in late 2023, aims to establish consistency in how police handle, retain, and use custody images, particularly for facial recognition.
While these images are regarded as valuable tools for investigations, their retention raises critical concerns about privacy, public trust, and the legitimacy of police operations.
Oversight of biometric data and surveillance technologies falls under the responsibility of the biometrics and surveillance camera commissioner. This role is intended to ensure that police practices comply with legal and ethical principles.
UK Police Face Scrutiny Over Unlawful Retention of Millions of Custody Images for Facial Recognition
However, repeated warnings from current and former commissioners have highlighted systemic issues, including the continued retention of images despite legal rulings. These concerns emphasize the need for clearer policies and stronger enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance.
The rapid advancement and adoption of surveillance technologies have further complicated the issue. Tools such as facial recognition, voice analysis, and automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) are now being used in ways that extend beyond their original purposes.
Reports point to “mission creep,” where these technologies increasingly monitor behavior, associations, and networks without adequate oversight. Policymakers are urged to address these developments to prevent misuse and ensure accountability.
Parliamentary inquiries and independent reviews have repeatedly called for robust legal frameworks to govern the use of biometric technologies by law enforcement. Critics argue that existing regulations, including the Data Protection Act and the Human Rights Act, are inadequate for addressing the challenges posed by emerging technologies.
While the Home Office and police contend that current laws are sufficient, privacy advocates and legal experts continue to push for more explicit and comprehensive regulations.
Building public confidence in law enforcement’s use of advanced surveillance tools remains a pressing priority. The latest reports emphasize the importance of transparency, stakeholder engagement, and the establishment of clear, accessible policies.
Without these measures, public skepticism and concerns about privacy violations may erode trust in police practices. As surveillance technologies continue to evolve, the tension between effective policing and protecting individual rights demands urgent and thoughtful resolution.
