I am beginning the process of gathering the latest information from all police forces under my jurisdiction on their use of overt surveillance camera systems.
Professor Sampson praises the government on its decision not to hand oversight of police use of DNA and fingerprints to the ICO.
The use of biometric surveillance by the state is a matter of increasing sensitivity and significant public concern - not just here but globally. As almost all of the technological capability for biometric surveillance is privately owned, the only way we will be able to harness the legitimate uses of that technology in the future is in trusted partnership with trusted private sector partners.
London School of Economics, 5pm-9.15pm, 14 June 2022. Is there a legitimate role for facial recognition in policing and law enforcement? Hear the evidence of experts and make your own judgement - what’s your verdict?
Technology using biometric data is progressing at a rapid pace. Finding the right balance between the privacy concerns and entitlements of the individual while harnessing new technology responsibly, accountably and proportionately is proving to be a significant challenge for policing today; tomorrow’s technology will make it even more so. Which is why there needs to be an informed and realistic response to the government’s idea of soaking up the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner functions within a data regulator’s role which is buried at the end of the DCMS’ ongoing broad consultation.
The government has launched a consultation on proposed alterations to the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice. This is the first revision to the Code since its introduction in June 2013.
The Service Level Agreement (SLA) framework is a guidance document designed to help you and your organisation develop an SLA yourselves. An effective SLA is a crucial part of any partnership working arrangements between organisations. This template has been designed specifically for partnerships between relevant authorities defined at section 33(5) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (local authorities and police forces) regarding the operation of surveillance camera systems.
The expression “if you’ve done nothing wrong you’ve nothing to worry about” is not the answer to legitimate public concern over surveillance. Here are 5 reasons for abandoning the argument once and for all.
Hello! I’m Fraser Sampson, the new Surveillance Camera Commissioner (and Biometrics Commissioner too). I came into post on 1 March and with so much going on in both the world of surveillance and biometrics, I’m sure the next few weeks and months are going to be busy, but I think this is an exciting time and I’m looking forward to the road ahead.
Earlier this year I sent a survey to LAs in England and Wales to gain a better understanding as to the extent to which they were complying with their statutory responsibilities arising from Section 33(1) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) and the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice, in connection with their use of overt surveillance camera systems in public places.