Critics have branded the technology as an “erosion of civil liberties”, reports Kumail Jaffer, Local Democracy Reporter

The Metropolitan Police must re-evaluate the supposed success of live facial recognition (LFR) technology before it is used increasingly in London and rolled out across England, the force has been told.

London Assembly members have raised concerns about the Met’s decision to more than double the frequency of use of the technology in the capital, as well as the Home Office announcing seven more police forces will now be able to utilise it.

In the last twelve months, 580 arrests for offences including rape, domestic abuse and knife crime were arrested using LFR technology, the Met said.

The force claimed that without its use, “these offenders may otherwise have remained unlawfully at large, posing a continued threat to the public and taking up much more officer time to locate them.”

They added: “LFR is helping to apprehend wanted criminals in London and catch those who are breaking bail conditions without the need for extensive police resources or frequent visits.”

Critics have branded the use of LFR, which maps a person’s unique facial features, and matches them against faces on watchlists, as an “erosion of civil liberties”, and have questioned how the Met measured its success given the resources poured into the technology and the fact that hundreds of thousands of faces have been scanned.

Zoe Garbett, a Green Party London Assembly member, told the Local Democracy Service:  “We are told that the Met’s LFR rollout has been a success due to the number of arrests made using the technology – but the figure is not given in context compared with the effort and resources invested.

“The Met has not done a business cost on LFR technology, and so we have no means of measuring success.

“People would not want their fingerprints taken every time they go into town – but we have slowly allowed this erosion of civil liberties to happen.

“There needs to be a proper pause and review on the use of LFR technology to see whether its the best use of resources for policing – we should not just take the number of arrests out of context to measure this.

“On a whole, the Met need to think whether this is the relationship they want with Londoners.

“This technology undermines our fundamental democratic principles by treating us all as suspects, often without our knowledge or consent.

“While it’s disappointing to see this technology rolled out across the country, I’ll continue holding the Met to account to ensure its use is properly scrutinised.”

Gareth Roberts, the Liberal Democrat police and crime lead on the London Assembly, told the Local Democracy Reporting Service: “The Met should not be racing ahead to even further expand the use of live facial recognition technology before a proper national legal framework is in place.

“Using this intrusive technology without strong safeguards risks eroding civil liberties, disproportionately targeting minoritised communities and undermining public trust in the Met.”

In March, it emerged that over half of the 180 facial recognition deployments in London last year took place in areas with a higher proportion of Black residents than the city’s average.

This included Croydon, where over a fifth of people identify as black or black British. In 2024, 128,518 faces were scanned for just 133 arrests.

Campaign group Big Brother Watch said LFR technology is “authoritarian” and can have “life-changing consequences” if used mistakenly.

The privacy watchdog is currently assisting Shaun Thompson, who was wrongly identified as a suspect by LFR technology last year, in bringing a High Court challenge against the Met Police.

Madeleine Stone, senior advocacy officer at the organisation, told the Local Democracy Reporting Service: “The Met police are currently facing a legal challenge over their use of live facial recognition surveillance after an anti-knife crime community worker was wrongly flagged by the technology as a criminal. The Home Office’s decision to invest millions of pound in this Orwellian surveillance technology while a crucial judicial review on the matter is pending is deeply misguided.

“Policing resources are threadbare in London, and with many serious crimes not even being investigated, spending millions of pounds on rights-abusing technology is an insult to Londoners.

“The expansion of facial recognition technology comes at a serious cost to the taxpayer, to our civil liberties, and to stretched policing resources.”

Lindsey Chiswick, NPCC lead for facial recognition, said: “The police have a duty to prevent crime and keep the public safe.

“Live facial recognition supports effective policing, enabling officers to locate suspects quickly and accurately.

“The increased access to live facial recognition vehicles to forces that previously did not have the capability is an excellent opportunity for policing.

“Each live facial recognition deployment will be targeted, intelligence led, within a set geographical location and for defined period of time, ensuring deployments are proportionate, lawful and necessary.

“Live facial recognition has already been used in policing to great success, locating thousands of wanted offenders, or others breaching their bail conditions.

“I am confident that the increased use of this technology will continue to support the safety of communities across the country moving forward.”

No news is bad news 

Independent news outlets like ours – reporting for the community without rich backers – are under threat of closure, turning British towns into news deserts. 

The audiences they serve know less, understand less, and can do less. 

If our coverage has helped you understand our community a little bit better, please consider supporting us with a monthly, yearly or one-off donation. 

Choose the news. Don’t lose the news.

Monthly direct debit 

Annual direct debit

£5 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else, £10 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else and a print copy posted to them each month.  £50 annual supporters get a digital copy of each month's paper before anyone else.

More information on supporting us monthly or annually 

More Information about donations