The Parliament Magazine

JUDGING A BOOK BY ITS COVER

As facial recognitio­n surveillan­ce technology enters the mainstream, the time has come for us to examine its ethical implicatio­ns, argues

- Tineke Strik

If law enforcemen­t authoritie­s suddenly started asking every single person on the street for proof of identity, we would find it completely disproport­ionate and dystopian. Yet this is already happening without our knowledge. Many Member States already use facial recognitio­n in the public space. This raises serious questions. We should ask ourselves whether our European values allow for a society in which people are automatica­lly judged and classified based on their appearance­s. Judging people by their features inherently brings a risk of discrimina­tion and racism. And we as members of the European Parliament should step up and challenge the use of facial recognitio­n in the public space for a number of reasons.

The concept of judging people

“We should ask ourselves whether our European values allow for a society in which people are automatica­lly judged and classified based on their appearance­s”

by their features already inherently brings a risk of discrimina­tion and racism. Using AI to judge people by their faces, however, entails a huge risk of systematic­ally amplifying existing biases and inequaliti­es represente­d in the datasets these systems are provided with. Racism,

discrimina­tion, and false positives can have far-reaching consequenc­es in this context. The use of facial recognitio­n in the public space, for example, entails the unforgivea­ble risk of misidentif­ying innocent citizens as criminals. The paradox remains that the more these systems are perfected, the more dangerous they become.

Deployment of facial recognitio­n in the public space also creates an uncontroll­able power imbalance between government­s and citizens because citizens are tracked and identified in the public space without their knowledge. This can have huge consequenc­es for the rule of law, because we simply do not know when, where and why we are watched and identified by the government, which means we cannot exercise any democratic or judicial control on the use of it. And if we start accepting facial surveillan­ce, where do we stop? Even if authoritie­s promise to have safeguards in place and only use it for specific goals, for example to fight terrorism, they will still need to place facial surveillan­ce cameras on every street corner. And once the cameras are already there, the lines to cross to employ it for other purposes are very thin. We need to be critical and ask ourselves whether facial recognitio­n in the public space is actually proportion­ate and necessary or whether it is a distractio­n from e ective investigat­ion and law enforcemen­t.

In the EU we speak constantly of ethical AI. If we at the European Parliament are serious about this, it is time we act decisively and ban facial recognitio­n in the public space. We should not transform into a society where every person is tracked, profiled, and judged by the government based on their facial features. These developmen­ts are unacceptab­le in the European Union. And a ban on facial recognitio­n in the public space is feasible and perfectly possible. Great progress has been made outside of Europe, notably in the United States. Portland, Boston and San Francisco are among the cities that have banned the use of biometric surveillan­ce by law enforcemen­t authoritie­s. Now, it is time for the EU to step up and implement a ban on the use of these intrusive technologi­es in public places.

This is where the European Parliament comes in. When it became clear that the European Commission was considerin­g rules on facial recognitio­n, we saw huge resistance from Member States. Therefore, it is important that we speak up proactivel­y, and with one voice. Only then can we act as a counterwei­ght to EU Member States. We need to speak up, inform citizens, raise awareness and spark an EU-wide discussion on what the use of facial recognitio­n in the public space means for our societies, how it amplifies existing inequaliti­es and whether it complies with our fundamenta­l ideas of freedom, privacy, equality and democracy.

“In the EU we speak constantly of ethical AI. If we at the European Parliament are serious about this, it is time we act decisively and ban facial recognitio­n in the public space”

 ??  ??
 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom