NextFin

UK Equality Regulator Rules Metropolitan Police’s Facial Recognition Use Unlawful

Summarized by NextFin AI
  • The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) criticized the Metropolitan Police Service (Met) for its unlawful use of live facial recognition technology (LFRT), stating it violates human rights protections.
  • Despite over 1,000 arrests linked to LFRT, the EHRC raised concerns about its intrusive nature, potential for misidentification, and negative impact on public protests.
  • The EHRC has permission to intervene in a judicial review in January 2026 challenging the legality of the Met's LFRT policy, prompted by privacy campaigners.
  • The Met plans to use LFRT at major public events, facing opposition from civil rights groups who highlight risks of privacy invasion and discrimination.

NextFin news, On August 20, 2025, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), the UK's human rights regulator, publicly criticized the Metropolitan Police Service (Met) for its use of live facial recognition technology (LFRT) in London, declaring the police force's current policy unlawful and incompatible with human rights law.

The EHRC stated that the Met’s deployment of LFRT, which scans faces in real-time via CCTV and compares them against police watchlists, breaches key protections under the European Convention on Human Rights, including the rights to privacy, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly. The regulator emphasized that the technology should only be used in a necessary, proportionate manner with appropriate safeguards, standards the Met’s current policy fails to meet.

The Met has used LFRT since January 2024 and reported over 1,000 arrests linked to the technology, including suspects charged or cautioned for serious crimes such as paedophilia, rape, and violent robbery. Despite this, the EHRC expressed concern about the intrusive nature of the technology, its potential for misidentification, and its chilling effect on public protests and democratic rights.

The EHRC has been granted permission to intervene in an upcoming judicial review scheduled for January 2026, which challenges the lawfulness of the Met’s facial recognition policy. This legal challenge was brought by privacy campaigners and individuals who have been wrongly identified by the technology, including Shaun Thompson, who alleges mistreatment following a false alert.

John Kirkpatrick, Chief Executive of the EHRC, acknowledged the potential benefits of LFRT in combating serious crime but stressed the need for clear legal rules to ensure its use respects human rights. He said, "There must be clear rules which guarantee that live facial recognition technology is used only where necessary, proportionate and constrained by appropriate safeguards. We believe that the Metropolitan Police's current policy falls short of this standard."

The Metropolitan Police responded by affirming their confidence in the lawfulness of their use of LFRT and confirmed their full engagement with the judicial review process. A spokesperson said, "A judicial review hearing is scheduled for January 2026 and we are fully engaged in this process. We are confident that our use of live facial recognition is lawful and follows the policy."

The controversy has intensified as the Met announced plans to deploy LFRT at major public events such as the Notting Hill Carnival over the August bank holiday weekend, a move opposed by civil rights groups and privacy advocates who warn of privacy invasion and discrimination risks.

Currently, no specific UK legislation governs police use of live facial recognition technology, with police relying on common law powers. The EHRC and campaigners call for comprehensive legal frameworks to regulate the technology’s use and protect citizens’ rights.

Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.

Insights

What is live facial recognition technology (LFRT) and how does it work?

What were the main reasons behind the EHRC's criticism of the Metropolitan Police's use of LFRT?

How has the use of LFRT by the Metropolitan Police evolved since its introduction in January 2024?

What are the potential benefits of LFRT according to its proponents?

What key human rights protections are allegedly breached by the Metropolitan Police's use of LFRT?

How many arrests have been linked to the use of LFRT by the Metropolitan Police?

What are the implications of the EHRC's intervention in the upcoming judicial review?

What are the main concerns raised by civil rights groups regarding LFRT deployment at public events?

What legal frameworks currently exist in the UK to regulate the use of LFRT by police?

How does the current situation of LFRT usage in the UK compare to other countries?

What are the risks associated with misidentification when using LFRT?

How do privacy campaigners plan to challenge the Metropolitan Police’s facial recognition policy?

What impact could the judicial review have on the future use of LFRT in the UK?

How does the lack of specific legislation affect the use of LFRT by police in the UK?

In what ways could LFRT affect public protests and democratic rights?

What steps can be taken to ensure that LFRT is used in a manner that respects human rights?

What are the main arguments for and against the use of LFRT in policing?

How might the potential deployment of LFRT at events like the Notting Hill Carnival change public perceptions of policing?

What is the position of the Metropolitan Police regarding the legality of their LFRT use?

What actions are being called for by the EHRC and campaigners to protect citizens' rights regarding LFRT?

Search
NextFinNextFin
NextFin.Al
No Noise, only Signal.
Open App