FOI 381/25

REQUEST

 

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act for information regarding your force’s use of Facial Recognition Technology, Retrospective Facial Recognition and the Police National Database (PND). Please provide the following information about your force’s use of Facial Recognition Technology, Retrospective Facial Recognition and the Police National Database (PND) for the periods between January 2024 and today’s date; if you do not hold this information for the whole length of the period stated above, please provide it for the period starting from the date you began recording the information:

 

1. The processes (if any) undertaken by your force when using the Police National Database's face search capability to identify children (minors under the age of 18).

 

2. If there is a Child Rights Impact Assessment for the use of:
3. a) The Police National Database (PND)
4. b) Facial Recognition Technology
5. c) Retrospective Facial Recognition Technology

 

3. Are CCTV images and footage retained on the Force Video management system, including those which depict children under the age of 16 and under the age of 18?

 

4. Are images or data from facial recognition searches (in particular of minors under the age of 18) shared with other agencies or private organisations? If so, under what conditions?

 

5. If your force does not currently use Facial Recognition Technology, retrospective Facial Recognition and/or the Police National Database (PND) please state if there are there plans to.

 

RESPONSE

 

We consulted with our Crime and Criminal Justice Department and our Digital Services Department who have provided the following information in relation to your request.

 

Question 1

 

South Wales Police (SWP) follows detailed national guidance on utilisation of Police National Database (PND).  An image search in PND is to identify an unidentified subject, thus at the stage of a search, the age of any subject is unlikely to be known. 

 

Question 2a

 

No, not within any SWP generated guidance.  As above, SWP follows national guidance.

Question 2b & 2c

 

There is not a specific Child rights impact assessment however consideration of the rights of children are included in DPIA and EIA see link below

 

Facial Recognition Technology | South Wales Police

 

Question 3

 

All CCTV and images are stored on the force video management system including those depicting children under the age of 16 and those under the age of 18. These are stored in line with all Information Management guidance.

 

Question 4

 

No images or data relating to facial recognition searches are shared with other agencies or private organisations.

 

Question 5

 

Not applicable.

 

South Wales Police can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any further information relating to your request as the duty in S1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following exemptions:

 

• Section 23(5) Information relating to the Security Bodies;
• Section 24(2) National Security;
• Section 31(3) Law Enforcement;

 

Section 23 is an absolute class-based exemption and there is no requirement to conduct a harm or public interest test.

 

Sections 24, and 31 are prejudice based qualified exemptions and there is a requirement to articulate the harm that would be caused in confirming or denying that any other information is held as well as carrying out a public interest test.

 

Overall Harm

 

Any disclosure under FOI is a release to the public at large. Whilst not questioning the motives of the applicant, confirming or denying that any other information relating to the covert practise of facial recognition would show criminals what the capacity, tactical abilities and capabilities of the force are, allowing them to target specific areas of the UK to conduct their criminal/terrorist activities. Confirming or denying the specific circumstances in which the Police Service may or may not deploy covert facial recognition would lead to an increased risk of harm to covert investigations and compromise law enforcement. This would be to the detriment of providing an efficient policing service and a failure in providing a duty of care to all members of the public.

 

The threat from terrorism cannot be ignored. It is generally recognised that the international security landscape is increasingly complex and unpredictable. Since 2006, the UK Government has published the threat level:

https://www.mi5.gov.uk/threat-levels.The UK continues to face a sustained threat from violent extremists and terrorists and based upon current intelligence the threat level is set at Substantial. It is well established that police forces use covert tactics and surveillance to gain intelligence in order to counteract criminal behaviour. It has been previously documented in the media that many terrorist incidents have been thwarted due to intelligence gained by these means.

 

Confirming or denying whether any information is or isn’t held relating to covert facial recognition would limit operational capabilities as criminals, including terrorists would gain a greater understanding of the police’s methods and techniques, enabling offenders to take steps to counter them. It may also suggest the limitations of police capabilities in this area, which may further encourage criminal/terrorist activity by exposing potential vulnerabilities. This detrimental effect is increased if the request is made to several different law enforcement bodies. In addition to the local criminal fraternity now being better informed, those intent on organised crime throughout the UK will be able to map where the use of certain tactics are or are not deployed. This can be useful information to those committing crimes. It would have the likelihood of identifying location-specific operations which would ultimately compromise police tactics, operations and future prosecutions as criminals could counteract the measures used against them.

 

Any information identifying the focus of policing activity could be used to the advantage of terrorists or criminal organisations. Information that undermines the operational integrity of these activities will adversely affect public safety and have a negative impact on both National Security and Law Enforcement.

 

Public Interest Test

 

Section 24 - Factors favouring confirming or denying that any other information is held

 

Confirming or denying that any other information exists relevant to the request would lead to a better-informed public and the public are entitled to know how public funds are spent. The information simply relates to national security and disclosure would not actually harm it.

 

Section 24 - Factors against confirmation or denying that any other information is held

 

To confirm or deny whether South Wales Police hold any additional information would allow inferences to be made about the nature and extent of national security related activities which may or may not take place. This could enable terrorist groups to take steps to avoid detection, and as such, confirmation or denial would be damaging to national security. By confirming or denying any policing arrangements of this nature would render national security measures less effective. This would lead to the compromise of ongoing or future operations to protect the security or infra-structure on the UK and increase the risk of harm to the public.

 

Section 31 – Factors favouring confirming or denying that any other information is held

 

Confirming or denying whether any further information is held would allow the public to see where public funds have been spent and allow the Police service to appear more open and transparent.

 

Section 31 - Factors against confirmation or denying that any other information is held

By confirming or denying whether any further information is held would mean that law enforcement tactics would be compromised which would hinder the prevention and detection of crime. Security arrangements and tactics are re-used and have been monitored by criminal groups, fixated individuals and terrorists. These security arrangements and tactics would need to be reviewed which would require more resources and would add to the cost to the public purse.

 

Balance Test

 

The Police Service is charged with enforcing the law, preventing and detecting crime and protecting the communities we serve. The security of the country is of paramount importance and the Police Service will not divulge whether any other information is or is not held if to do so would place the safety of an individual at risk or undermine National Security. Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing, providing assurance that the Police Service is appropriately and effectively engaging with the threat from criminals, there is a very strong public interest in safeguarding both National Security and the integrity of the police in knowing that policing activity is appropriate and balanced in matters of National Security; this will only be overridden in exceptional circumstances.

 

It is our opinion that for these issues the balancing test for confirming or denying whether any other information is held is not made out.

 

No inference can be taken from this refusal that any other information you have requested does or does not exist.