Défaite juridique dans l'opposition à la reconnaissance faciale au Royaume-Uni

  • L'analyse autour du RGPD impacte sans doute assez directement le recours déposé devant le Tribunal administratif de Marseille

    UK court backs police in facial recognition lawsuit
    The ruling is a blow for privacy advocate Ed Bridges, who led the first major legal challenge against police use of facial recognition technology in Europe.
    '...) On Wednesday, a U.K. court dismissed a case brought against the South Wales Police over its use of live facial recognition technology, which allows police to scan the faces of thousands of individuals in real time and match their likenesses against a database of suspects.
    In its ruling, the court argued that the use of such technology was covered by existing law, rejecting arguments brought by privacy campaigner Ed Bridges and the London-based advocacy group Liberty that the tool’s deployment amounted to a violation of human rights and data protection law.

    Speaking in High Court, Lord Justice Haddon-Cave said that "the current legal regime is adequate to ensure the appropriate and non-arbitrary use of AFR Locate" — the technology used by South Wales Police.
    At a time when pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong have been filmed sawing down facial recognition “towers” in an effort to avoid detection and arrest, the ruling suggests that courts in the U.K. and elsewhere in Europe may not stand in the way of further so-called experiments with the technology by police across the European Union, despite the bloc’s far-reaching privacy protections.

    Indeed, as the ruling underscores, Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) includes exemptions for the collection of biometric data like facial likenesses by authorities, even though such information is considered “sensitive” and highly restricted in the hands of private companies.
    Source: https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-court-backs-police-in-facial-recognition-lawsuit/

  • Mince. Il va falloir demander le jugement pour voir exactement l'analyse faite par le juge. Attention qu'ici, c'est sur l'usage de la police, normalement, c'est directive police/justice et pas RGPD (sauf s'ils ont considéré que c'était une expérimentation et donc soumise au RGPD).