Scottish opposition presses to expand biometrics commissioner oversight role

All forms of biometric data collection and processing – whether by public or private organizations – should come under the scrutiny of the Scottish Biometrics Commissioner, says Liam McArthur, a Member of the Scottish Parliament and the justice spokesperson for opposition party, the Liberal Democrats, reports Public Technology.

This would see the scope of the Scottish Biometrics Commissioner expand from overseeing the use of biometric data and DNA in policing and criminal justice, to all forms such as facial recognition surveillance in schools and public places.

Biometrics oversight and law is a devolved matter in the UK. For example, live facial recognition is not legal in Scotland, but is in England and Wales. Likewise, Scotland has its own Biometrics Commissioner, Dr. Brian Plastow, the former police chief.

Last year, less than a year into his eight-year tenure, Plastow drafted and had passed what the Scottish Government calls a ‘world-first’ statutory code of practice for the use of biometric data in policing and criminal justice.

Lib Dem’s McArthur submitted a parliamentary question on the expansion of the role to which justice secretary Keith Brown said there are no plans to bring further areas under the Biometrics Commissioner.

Public Technology quotes McArthur as saying: “Scottish Liberal Democrats fought tooth and nail for recognition that the law on biometrics was outdated in the face of the full force of modern technology. Biometric technologies which draw on our personal characteristics are becoming an ever-greater part of all our lives. They are emerging at an incredible rate, but we need to ensure our laws keep up and that people’s rights aren’t infringed.

“That is why we need to regulate the use of existing technologies and future-proof them to cover those systems that won’t have even been invented yet. These technologies are not restricted to the police and the criminal justice system so why is the biometrics commissioner?”

South of the border

Plastow’s counterpart for England and Wales, Fraser Sampson, is also facing challenges to his role despite the growth of the technologies he oversees. When the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill (formerly Data Reform Bill) is passed by the Westminster government, it will take Sampson’s powers and give them to the Information Commissioner’s Office and the Investigatory Powers Commissioner.

Or at least that was the plan. The Home Office has extended Sampson’s tenure which was due to expire at the end of the month. Sampson has just filed his first combined annual report for the surveillance camera and biometrics roles. It found fault with many aspects of the use of biometrics in the UK and international cooperation. Yet he also noted that the public will continue to expect authorities to make use of new biometrics technologies as they become available.

His counterpart Brian Plastow welcomed Sampson’s report: “I share and endorse the concerns expressed by Professor Sampson in his annual report about plans within the UK Data Protection and Digital Information Bill to treat the output from the police use of public space surveillance technology solely as a question of data protection.

“This proposition in my view is erroneous and will have devolution consequences for Scotland because of the broader definition of ‘biometric data’ adopted in Scotland under the Scottish Biometrics Commissioner Act 2020.”

The Scottish Biometrics Commissioner likewise welcomed a report last year by Matthew Ryder KC on behalf of the Ada Lovelace Institute, which urgently called for new laws and better regulations over biometric data and technologies in England and Wales.

Article Topics

biometric identifiers  |  biometrics  |  commercial applications  |  data protection  |  law enforcement  |  legislation  |  regulation  |  Scotland  |  Scottish Biometrics Commissioner