TLDR
- UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has pledged to increase the use of live facial recognition technology in response to recent far-right riots across the country.
- The riots were triggered by false claims about the identity of a suspect in a stabbing incident at a Taylor Swift-themed summer holiday club.
- Starmer announced a new national violent disorder program that will consider broader use of facial recognition to track and prevent potential rioters from traveling.
- Civil rights groups, including Big Brother Watch, have criticized the plan, calling it an ineffective use of police resources and a threat to democracy.
- The use of facial recognition technology in the UK remains controversial, with concerns about its accuracy, potential racial bias, and lack of explicit legal basis.
In response to a wave of riots across the United Kingdom, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced plans to expand the use of live facial recognition technology (LFR) as part of a new national violent disorder program.
The move has sparked debate about the balance between public safety and civil liberties, with critics arguing that the technology poses risks to privacy and democratic freedoms.
The riots, which broke out in several cities including Southport and Leeds, were triggered by false claims circulating online about the identity of a suspect in a stabbing incident at a Taylor Swift-themed summer holiday club.
Despite authorities naming the Welsh-born suspect, misinformation spread that the attacker was an asylum seeker, fueling anti-Muslim and anti-immigration sentiment.
Addressing the situation, Starmer stated,
“It’s not protest. It’s not legitimate. It’s crime and violent disorder. An assault on the rule of law and the execution of justice.” He emphasized the need for a more mobile and responsive policing strategy to combat the spread of unrest across different communities.
The proposed national violent disorder program will consider broader deployment of facial recognition technology, which is already in use by some police forces in the UK. Starmer suggested that the technology could be used to identify and restrict the movement of potential troublemakers before they can travel to areas of unrest, comparing the approach to measures used to control football hooliganism.
“These thugs are mobile, they move from community to community, and we must have a policing response that can do the same,” Starmer explained. “Shared intelligence, wider deployment of facial recognition technology, and preventive action – criminal behavior orders to restrict their movements before they can even board a train, in just the same way we do with football hooligans.”
However, the announcement has drawn criticism from civil rights organizations. Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, called the plan “alarming” and argued that it would “plunder more vital police resources on mass surveillance that threatens rather than protects democracy.”
Carlo pointed out that while such technology is common in countries like Russia and China, it is banned in Europe due to privacy concerns.
The use of facial recognition technology in the UK has been controversial, with ongoing debates about its accuracy, potential racial bias, and legal basis. Earlier this year, the House of Lords’ Justice and Home Affairs Committee raised concerns about the lack of adequate oversight and public trust in the technology’s use.
Despite these concerns, some police forces, including the Metropolitan Police Service and South Wales Police, have already implemented permanent live facial recognition capabilities. The Met Police defend their use of the technology, citing independent testing by the National Physical Laboratory that found no significant demographic performance variations when using their current settings.
The expansion of facial recognition technology is part of a broader effort to combat the spread of misinformation and violent disorder. Starmer also called on social media companies to take responsibility for content on their platforms that may contribute to unrest, stating, “Violent disorder clearly whipped up online – that is also a crime.”
