FB pixel

Poor biometrics options, understanding of DNA hindering UK refugee reunification

King’s College report recommends policy, training upgrades
Poor biometrics options, understanding of DNA hindering UK refugee reunification
 

Officials with the UK Home Office responsible for decisions on refugee family reunification are struggling to understand key points about DNA comparisons, including the probabilistic nature of DNA analysis, according to a new report.

The report from King’s Legal Clinic at King’s College London (KCL) on refugee family reunification (RFR) notes challenges for applicants caused by “extensive and onerous evidential requirements, significant procedural delays, onerous biometric requirements in particular in inaccessible regions,” and difficulties related to DNA evidence.

The Refugee Family Reunion report’s publication follows a workshop KCL hosted with participation from the British Red Cross, the Refugee Council, Safe Passage, UNHCR, IRAP, Pathways International, the Home Office, Refugee & Migrant Forum of Essex and London (RAMFEL), and Refugee Legal Support.

DNA testing poses a financial and logistical burden for applicants, the report says, and when completed, officials often seek 100 percent certainty that is “not scientifically feasible.”

The report authors recommend Home Office consider alternative biometric solutions so people in areas without facilities for biometrics data collection can apply without extensive travel, and waivers could be applied to the biometrics requirement in some situations. Training for decision-makers who review DNA reports should also be increased, they say.

The report cites KCL Professor Syndercombe Court’s argument “that while DNA testing can be invaluable for establishing familial links, it is not without limitations and complexities, which can inadvertently hinder families seeking reunification. While DNA testing is a critical tool for establishing familial relationships, it cannot provide absolute certainty.”

DNA testing standards are also somewhat inconsistent despite the high fees paid by applicants.

The UK government, meanwhile, continues to struggle with the twin challenges of government digitization and immigration control.

Related Posts

Article Topics

 |   |   |   |   | 

Latest Biometrics News

 

Face biometrics use cases outnumbered only by important considerations

With face biometrics now used regularly in many different sectors and areas of life, stakeholders are asking questions about a…

 

Biometric Update Podcast explores identification at scale using browser fingerprinting

“Browser fingerprinting is this idea that modern browsers are so complex.” So says Valentin Vasilyev, Chief Technology Officer of Fingerprint,…

 

Passkeys now pervasive but passwords persist in enterprise authentication

Passkeys are here; now about those passwords. Specifically, passkeys are now prevalent in the enterprise, the FIDO Alliance says, with…

 

Pornhub returns to UK, but only for iOS users who verify age with Apple

In the UK, “wanker” is not typically a term of endearment. However, the case may be different for Pornhub, which…

 

Europol operated ‘shadow’ IT systems without data safeguards: Report

Europol has operated secret data analysis platforms containing large amounts of personal information, such as identity documents, without the security…

 

EU pushes AI Act deadlines for high-risk systems, including biometrics

The EU has reached a provisional agreement on changes to the AI Act that postpone rules on high-risk AI systems,…

Comments

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Biometric Market Analysis and Buyer's Guides

Most Viewed This Week

Featured Company

Biometrics Insight, Opinion

Digital ID In-Depth

Biometrics White Papers

Biometrics Events