Quantum surveillance and 'shared secrets'. A biometric step too far? CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe, July 2010

It is no longer sensible to regard biometrics as having neutral socio-economic, legal and political impacts. Newer generation biometrics are fluid and include behavioural and emotional data that can be combined with other data. Therefore, a range of issues needs to be reviewed in light of the increasing privatisation of ‘security’ that escapes effective, democratic parliamentary and regulatory control and oversight at national, international and EU levels, argues Juliet Lodge, Professor and co-Director of the Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence at the University of Leeds, U

Biometrics, presents, futures: the imaginative politics of science–society orderings

Biometric technology encompasses a proliferating array of data forms, applications, and stakeholders but has raised numerous social and ethical concerns. This article examines contending perceptions of biometrics by developing a three-way framework of science–society orderings, drawn from social studies of biometrics and wider science studies literature. By analysing documentary sources and participant observation data through this framework, the article identifies a series of distinct normative interpretations or imaginaries of biometrics. It is argued that these imaginaries, described, respectively, as ‘public good’, ‘collective control’, and ‘societal risks’, project contending normative framings of science–society relations. These imaginaries were also however found to reflexively encompass perceived challenges, giving rise to practices that I term imaginative politics. These findings raise the need for science policy studies to consider the distinction between imagining and realizing in greater depth and to consider more profoundly the politics of science–society co-production

Biometric Identification, Law and Ethics

This book undertakes a multifaceted and integrated examination of biometric identification, including the current state of the technology, how it is being used, the key ethical issues, and the implications for law and regulation. The five chapters examine the main forms of contemporary biometrics–fingerprint recognition, facial recognition and DNA identification– as well the integration of biometric data with other forms of personal data, analyses key ethical concepts in play, including privacy, individual autonomy, collective responsibility, and joint ownership rights, and proposes a raft of principles to guide the regulation of biometrics in liberal democracies.Biometric identification technology is developing rapidly and being implemented more widely, along with other forms of information technology. As products, services and communication moves online, digital identity and security is becoming more important. Biometric identification facilitates this transition. Citizens now use biometrics to access a smartphone or obtain a passport; law enforcement agencies use biometrics in association with CCTV to identify a terrorist in a crowd, or identify a suspect via their fingerprints or DNA; and companies use biometrics to identify their customers and employees. In some cases the use of biometrics is governed by law, in others the technology has developed and been implemented so quickly that, perhaps because it has been viewed as a valuable security enhancement, laws regulating its use have often not been updated to reflect new applications. However, the technology associated with biometrics raises significant ethical problems, including in relation to individual privacy, ownership of biometric data, dual use and, more generally, as is illustrated by the increasing use of biometrics in authoritarian states such as China, the potential for unregulated biometrics to undermine fundamental principles of liberal democracy. Resolving these ethical problems is a vital step towards more effective regulation.Ethics & Philosophy of Technolog

Critically Envisioning Biometric Artificial Intelligence in Law Enforcement

This report presents an overview of the Critically Exploring Biometric AI Futures project led by the University of Edinburgh in partnership with the University of Stirling. This short 3-month project explored the use of new Biometric Artificial Intelligence (AI) in law enforcement, the challenges of fostering trust around deployment and debates surrounding social, ethical and legal concerns

Critically Envisioning Biometric Artificial Intelligence in Law Enforcement

This report presents an overview of the Critically Exploring Biometric AI Futures project led by the University of Edinburgh in partnership with the University of Stirling. This short 3-month project explored the use of new Biometric Artificial Intelligence (AI) in law enforcement, the challenges of fostering trust around deployment and debates surrounding social, ethical and legal concerns

Forensic dna databasing: retention regimes and efficacy

Three legislative regimes have governed the England and Wales National DNA Database (NDNAD). These are broadly described as restrictive (1995 – 2001), expansive (2001 – 2013) and semi-restrictive/Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) regimes (2013 – present). The actual effectiveness of the three regimes remains abstruse. This research aimed to assess the efficacy of the different regimes to advance any reforms that may maximise the utility of the database and enhance the protection of public security and the individual’s right to privacy. The research focused on the societal and individual interest outcomes of DNA databasing. The methodology involved a document analysis of reports of oversight bodies, contributing to the establishment of the benefits, challenges and risks of the current regime. Secondly, a literature review of research into DNA databasing was conducted. Thisidentified key effectiveness indicators for the assessment of NDNAD regimes. A self-administered semi-structured questionnaire was used to assess the perception of the public about the statutory functions and ethical implications of the NDNAD. The questionnaire also asked about views on the most appropriate inclusion and retention criteria for the database. Lastly, a stakeholder survey was conducted to determine the views of experts on the efficacy of the NDNAD regimes against the effectiveness indicators. Overall, a majority of the 201 participants who answered the public survey perceived the NDNAD to be effective in detecting, investigating and prosecuting crime. The participants were sceptical about the ability of the NDNAD to prevent crime. This suggests a reform of the statutory purpose of DNA retention to represent actual outcomes. Most participants favoured the inclusion and retention of DNA data from arrested, charged or convicted individuals. A selective regime based on offence seriousness was preferred by participants for the retention of DNA data from convicted adults. This indicates a reform of the current blanket rule which allows indefinite retention. The surveyed expert group (n = 31, mainly law enforcement officers) perceived the expansive regime to be the most effective for public security, implementation cost and efficiency reasons. The findings imply discrepancies with the current law governing the NDNAD. Whilst participants of the public survey support further restrictions to the PoFA regime, the expert group favoured the expansive regime. The survey evidence suggests a need for a statutory requirement to generate systematic data about the actual effectiveness of the NDNAD. Further, a consultation scheme should be established to account for the acceptability of the NDNAD regime among a representative sample of the public. These reforms will help improve the legitimacy of the law and ensure a balanced approach in ‘shaping’ the proportionality of the NDNAD regime

Care planning for aggression management in a specialist secure mental health service:user involvement

This paper describes an audit of prevention and management of violence and aggression care plans and incident reporting forms which aimed to: (i) report the compliance rate of completion of care plans; (ii) identify the extent to which patients contribute to and agree with their care plan; (iii) describe de-escalation methods documented in care plans; and (iv) ascertain the extent to which the de-escalation methods described in the care plan are recorded as having been attempted in the event of an incident. Care plans and incident report forms were examined for all patients in men's and women's mental health care pathways who were involved in aggressive incidents between May and October 2012. In total, 539 incidents were examined, involving 147 patients and 121 care plans. There was no care plan in place at the time of 151 incidents giving a compliance rate of 72%. It was documented that 40% of patients had contributed to their care plans. Thematic analysis of de-escalation methods documented in the care plans revealed five de-escalation themes: staff interventions, interactions, space/quiet, activities and patient strategies/skills. A sixth category, coercive strategies, was also documented. Evidence of adherence to de-escalation elements of the care plan was documented in 58% of incidents. The reasons for the low compliance rate and very low documentation of patient involvement need further investigation. The inclusion of coercive strategies within de-escalation documentation suggests that some staff fundamentally misunderstand de-escalation

Modes of bio-bordering: the hidden (dis)integration of Europe

This open access book explores how biometric data is increasingly flowing across borders in order to limit, control and contain the mobility of selected people, namely criminalized populations. It introduces the concept of bio-bordering, using it to capture reverse patterns of bordering and ordering practices linked to transnational biometric data exchange regimes. The concept is useful to reconstruct how the territorial foundations of national state autonomy are partially reclaimed and, at the same time, partially purposefully suspended. The book focuses on the Prüm system, which facilitates the mandatory exchange of forensic DNA data amongst EU Member States. The Prüm system is an underexplored phenomenon, representing diverse instances of bio-bordering and providing a complex picture of the hidden (dis)integration of Europe. Particular legal, scientific, technical and political dimensions related to the governance and uses of biometric technologies in Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal and the United Kingdom are specifically explored to demonstrate both similar and distinct patterns.UIDB/00736/202