Scotland's Biometrics Chief Calls for Facial Recognition Law

Published Date : 10/21/2025 

Scotland's biometrics commissioner supports the introduction of primary legislation to regulate the use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology, emphasizing the need for clear legal boundaries and parliamentary debate. 

The UK has been grappling with the lack of unified regulation for facial recognition use over the past several years. Recently, Scotland has taken a significant step forward in this discussion, with lawmakers and regulators calling for a dedicated legislative framework.

After Scotland’s ruling party passed a resolution proposing that live facial recognition (LFR) systems should not be implemented without passing through primary legislation at the Scottish Parliament, the country’s biometrics commissioner has also expressed support for introducing new regulation.

“I do agree that primary legislation would allow this topic to be properly debated in Parliament as otherwise the police must rely on a patchwork of other laws,” says Scottish Biometrics Commissioner Brian Plastow, according to Futurescot.

The use of facial recognition in the UK is currently regulated by a combination of different regulations and standards, leaving it on shaky legal grounds. The London Metropolitan Police, for instance, has been facing a legal challenge in court over a misidentification case.

The Scottish Biometrics Commissioner’s Code of Practice has “several safeguards” that allow stricter controls of the technology compared to England and Wales, he says. Primary legislation, however, would help the police set clear boundaries around issues such as proportionality and necessity, according to Plastow.

The Commissioner has previously expressed support for the use of LFR for law enforcement purposes in principle. Police Scotland confirmed their decision to use live facial recognition in August, inviting criticism from both lawmakers and rights groups.

Last week, the Scottish National Party (SNP) released a resolution opposing police use of LFR. The party expressed concern over insufficient parliamentary discussion of the proposal and emphasized that any forthcoming LFR regulations must align with the Human Rights Act, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the EU AI Act. The resolution is not legally binding for the Scottish government.

Scottish lawmakers are not unique in opposing police use of LFR without a closer look into the technology. Members of the UK Parliament point out that there has been a lack of parliamentary debate on the topic, consultation with the public, and oversight over deployments. The approach has been quite different from the EU, which has put the bar “incredibly high,” Green MP Siân Berry told Politics Home.

“There is no way the current police use of LFR… would conform with what the EU decided after a proper, mature debate about what legislation there should be,” says Berry.

In July, the UK Home Office announced it was in the process of crafting a governance framework for police use of LFR. The government has also promised a consultation on the technology, including safeguards and oversight measures. MPs, however, point out that this may not be enough.

“So, what I want is actual laws to be passed, and for it not to be simply a consultation,” says Barry.

LFR is already being used by police in public spaces without proper oversight, according to Labour MP Kim Johnson. Although facial recognition use is governed by the UK’s data and human rights laws, the most detailed set of rules for its application comes from a guidance document published by the College of Policing. This raises questions about whether the police are simultaneously in charge of deploying LFR and supervising its use.

The Home Office also does not monitor whether individual police forces are using the face-match thresholds for facial recognition algorithms, which are recommended to mitigate the risks of racial bias. The information, however, is available on the police force’s websites, Politics Home reports.

In 2023, the UK’s largest police force collaborated with the National Physical Laboratory to test the equitability of its NEC facial recognition system. The study concluded that the system is “very accurate” at face-match thresholds 0.64 or higher. When set on lower settings, the algorithm exhibits a slight difference in performance between some demographics.

Most police forces use the setting but they are not required to do so by law. In addition, not all forces even use the same algorithm. Police in Suffolk and Essex, for instance, use a different algorithm at a sensitivity setting of at or above 0.55, which they say follows testing by the University of Cambridge.

The Suffolk Police notes that a lower face-match threshold would be used in special cases, such as an ongoing terrorist attack, and would be approved by an authorizing officer. Despite these issues, the use of LFR for law enforcement purposes is growing in the UK.

First deployed by the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police in 2017, the technology is being expanded to seven police forces across England and Wales. The latest one is the Greater Manchester Police. The Home Office has supplied the police force with two LFR vans with first deployments scheduled for October 21st and 23rd in Sale town center.

“It is a precise and targeted tool, only identifying specific individuals who have been added to a bespoke watchlist and will significantly speed up the process of identifying people at risk or wanted by police,” says Assistant Chief Constable Rick Jackson. “If you do happen to walk past one of our cameras and you’re not a match, your biometric data is immediately deleted. There is no recording or rewind facility.”

In Scotland, the police force has tested three scenarios for the use of LFR, although official deployments are yet to begin. The first scenario is “nighttime economy,” where the technology is used for monitoring sexual offenses and violence, the second is searching for missing people at busy areas, while the third focuses on integrating terrorism and other crime suspects at large events. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS): 

Q: What is live facial recognition (LFR)?

A: Live facial recognition (LFR) is a technology that uses cameras to identify individuals in real-time by comparing their facial features with a database of known faces.

Q: Why is Scotland calling for primary legislation on LFR?

A: Scotland is calling for primary legislation on LFR to ensure that the technology is used within a clear legal framework, addressing concerns about privacy, proportionality, and necessity.

Q: What are the current regulations for facial recognition in the UK?

A: The use of facial recognition in the UK is currently regulated by a combination of different laws and standards, which can create a patchwork of regulations and legal uncertainties.

Q: What are the main concerns about LFR use by police?

A: The main concerns about LFR use by police include potential misidentifications, lack of oversight, and the risk of racial bias in the algorithms used.

Q: What are the proposed scenarios for LFR use in Scotland?

A: The proposed scenarios for LFR use in Scotland include monitoring the nighttime economy for sexual offenses and violence, searching for missing people in busy areas, and integrating terrorism and other crime suspects at large events. 

More Related Topics :