‘Uncovering that my partner was ‘Mark Kennedy’ was traumatic, but there’s hope in being part of something bigger than myself.’
The Guardian, 25th November 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Britain’s biggest police force must hire 40% of new recruits from ethnic minority backgrounds, while officers will have to justify stop and search to community panels under new plans designed to quell the race crisis engulfing Scotland Yard.’
The Guardian, 13th November 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Mayor of London Sadiq Khan has called for police traffic stops to be reviewed to look at whether black people are disproportionately affected by some police tactics.’
BBC News, 13th November 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Black people are nine times more likely to be stopped and searched by police than white people, official figures for England and Wales show.’
The Guardian, 27th October 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Oscar Davies discusses the recent Privacy International case and its wider implications, in which the CJEU held that UK law went too far in permitting “general and indiscriminate” access of bulk communications data to MI5, MI6 and GCHQ.’
Lamb Chambers, October 2020
Source: www.lambchambers.co.uk
‘Serious Violence Reduction Orders (SVROs) are designed to ensure repeat offenders are more likely to be caught and put in prison.’
Home Office, 14th September 2010
Source: www.gov.uk/home-office
‘Ministers have launched a consultation to give police greater powers to stop and search individuals with prior knife convictions.’
The Independent, 14th September 2020
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘In R(Bridges) v South Wales Police, the England and Wales Court of Appeal reviewed the lawfulness of the use of live automated facial recognition technology (‘AFR’) by the South Wales Police Force. CCTV cameras capture images of the public, which are then compared with digital images of persons on a watchlist.’
Oxford Human Rights Hub, 3rd September 2020
Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk
‘The Court of Appeal, overturning a Divisional Court decision, has found the use of a facial recognition surveillance tool used by South Wales Police to be in breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The case was brought by Liberty on behalf of privacy and civil liberties campaigner Ed Bridges. The appeal was upheld on the basis that the interference with Article 8 of the ECHR, which guarantees a right to privacy and family life, was not “in accordance with law” due to an insufficient legal framework. However, the court found that, had it been in accordance with law, the interference caused by the use of facial recognition technology would not have been disproportionate to the goal of preventing crime. The court also found that Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) was deficient, and that the South Wales Police (SWP), who operated the technology, had not fulfilled their Public Sector Equality Duty.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 13th August 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘R. (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales [2020] EWCA Civ 1058 [2020] 8 WLUK 64 is thought to be the first case in the world to consider the use of facial recognition technology by law enforcement agencies. In this short article, we explore the judgment and its implications for the deployment of these and similar technologies in future.’
Doughty Street Chambers, 12th August 2020
Source: insights.doughtystreet.co.uk
‘The case of R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police & Information Commissioner [2020] EWCA Civ 1058 (handed down on 11 August 2020) was an appeal from what is said to have been the first claim brought before a court anywhere on planet earth concerning the use by police of automated facial recognition (“AFR”) technology. There could be nothing wrong with posting scores of police officers with eidetic memories to look out for up to a 800 wanted persons at public gatherings. So why not use a powerful computer, capable of matching 50 faces a second with a database of (under) 800 suspects, to do this job much more cheaply and instantaneously, flagging any matches to a human operator for final assessment? According to the Court of Appeal in Bridges, this system constitutes an interference with Article 8 rights which is not such as is in accordance with the law, but which (critically) would be proportionate if a sufficiently narrow local policy were framed.’
UK Police Law Blog, 11th August 2020
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
‘Campaigners are calling for South Wales police and other forces to stop using facial recognition technology after the court of appeal ruled that its use breached privacy rights and broke equalities law.’
The Guardian, 11th August 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘MI6 officers have been accused of attempting to interfere in a major legal battle over crimes linked to intelligence agencies.’
BBC News, 27th July 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The police watchdog is launching a review into whether police tactics, such as stop and search, discriminate against ethnic minorities.’
BBC News, 10th July 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘There has been renewed criticism over stop and search in the UK after research found that BAME people are 54% more likely to be fined under coronavirus rules than white people. The subsequent death of George Floyd in the US and the support for the Black Lives Matter movement has brought more scrutiny to the disproportionality.’
The Guardian, 7th July 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The ‘Third Direction case’, soon to be brought before the Court of Appeal, concerns the lawfulness of a previously secret national security policy of the UK Government. The policy authorises agents of the Security Service (MI5) to engage in criminal activity, which the claimants allege include the carrying out of torture and murder. Hearings on the case were held in November last year in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), a specialist tribunal which adjudicates complaints on state surveillance and the conduct of the Security Services (MI5, MI6 and GCHQ). The IPT produced a judgment remarkably quickly, published in December.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 7th July 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Automated facial recognition technology that searches for people in public places breaches privacy rights and will “radically” alter the way Britain is policed, the court of appeal has been told.’
The Guardian, 23rd June 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘This post discusses the impact of the new CLOUD Act international data sharing regime on the UK’s death penalty assurances policy. This regime—named after its enabling US legislation, the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act—is due to come into force in July 2020 following the signing of a bilateral US–UK agreement in October 2019 (US-UK Agreement). It provides a quicker alternative for law enforcement seeking access to electronic data overseas, beyond the existing mutual legal assistance (MLA) process, which operates through MLA treaties (MLATs) and other mechanisms. However, while the CLOUD Act regime has an admirable aim, its implementation weakens the UK’s existing death penalty assurances policy and thus risks exposing the UK and others to significant liability, as discussed below.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 1st June 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
© Inner Temple Library 2020