GS-2: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation
The ugly face of a crime-fighting move: Facial Recognition
In news Government has been exploring the potential of facial recognition technology.
About NAFRS
To empower the Indian police with information technology, India approved implementation of the National Automated Facial Recognition System (NAFRS)
It will function as a national-level search platform that will use facial recognition technology: to facilitate investigation of crime or for identifying a person of interest (e.g., a criminal) regardless of face mask, makeup, plastic surgery, beard or hair extension.
The system compares the faceprint generated with a large existing database of faceprints (typically available to law enforcement agencies) through a database on driver’s licence or police mugshots).
Do You Know?
FBI in US uses facial recognition technology for potential investigative leads; Police forces in England use facial recognition to tackle serious violence.
China use facial recognition for racial profiling and mass surveillance — to track Uighur Muslims.
Criticism of NAFRS
Violates Right to Privacy: As NAFRS will collect, process, and store sensitive private information: facial biometrics for long periods; if not permanently — it will impact the right to privacy.
Not 100% accurate: Facial recognition does not return a definitive result — it ‘identifies’ or ‘verifies’ only in probabilities (e.g., a 70% likelihood. Though the accuracy of facial recognition has improved over the years due to modern machine-learning algorithms, the risk of error and bias still exists.
Bias & Prejudice: Research suggests facial recognition software is based on pre-trained models. Therefore, if certain types of faces (such as female, children, ethnic minorities) are under-represented in training datasets, then this bias will negatively impact its performance.
Fear of Profiling: With the element of error and bias, facial recognition can result in profiling of some overrepresented groups (such as Dalits and minorities) in the criminal justice system.
Constitutionality Concerns: It is alleged that NAFRS fails the three tests of Puttaswamy Judgement: legitimacy (backed by law), proportionate to its need and least restrictive.
Lacks Statutory Clarity: There is potential for abuse and misuse of NAFRS especially when there is absence of clear guidelines for its deployment and lack of Comprehensive Data Protection Bill.
Chilling Effect on Civil Liberties: Unregulated use of facial recognition technology will dis-incentivise independent journalism or the right to assemble peaceably or any other form of civic society activism.
Federal Challenges: Policing and law and order being State subjects, some Indian States have started the use of new technologies without fully appreciating the dangers involved.
Conclusion
Government must enact a strong and meaningful data protection law, in addition to statutory authorisation of NAFRS and guidelines for deployment to prevent its misuse and abuse.
