According to the Home Office, ANPR works by instantly scanning
number plates – around 3,000 plates an hour - and matching them
against information stored in databases including the Police
National Computer, DVLA databases and local intelligence
databases.
The scan identifies vehicles of interest to the police such as
stolen cars or those involved in crime. It will also target those
driving without insurance, an MOT certificate, or even a current
tax disc.
When a suspicious vehicle is recognised it becomes the focus of
police targeted interceptions and enquiries. If the driver is
arrested, a DNA sample could be taken irrespective of whether the
driver is later charged or not.
The system has been successful in trials for, according to the
Home Office, it has so far helped police seize more than £100,000
in illegal drugs and recover over 300 stolen vehicles (with a value
in excess of £2 million) and £715,000 in stolen goods. More than
3,000 people were arrested - ten times more than the national
average - with the majority of arrests being for serious
crimes.
ANPR was piloted for six months by nine police forces. Following
the success of the pilot, it will be rolled out to 23 forces in
England and Wales, beginning in the summer of 2004.
However, the scanning rates of the system mean that the details
of many vehicles will be logged which are then not stopped by the
police or are of no interest to the police at all. This raises some
important questions. What happens to that data? Is it thrown away?
Who else uses the personal data? How long are personal data
retained?
A spokesman for the Home Office yesterday could not answer that
question because, he said, this was only a pilot project as yet.
"We have not got that sort of information available at this point,"
he said.
But the Home Office did confirm to OUT-LAW.COM that the use of
scanners would be publicised, and the vans they are contained in
would not be hidden. They would be "more visible than speed
cameras," said the spokesman, adding, "That is the point."
Dr. Chris Pounder of Masons, the firm behind OUT-LAW.COM, and
Editor of Data Protection and Privacy Practice, said:
"Normal data practice would require the personal data about the
vehicles that are not of interest to the police to be deleted as
soon as practicable. If the Home Office is considering the
retaining of such personal data, then it raises essentially the
same issues which are associated with the retention of
communications data under RIPA."
RIPA is the controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act
of 2000.
Only last month it was revealed by human rights watchdog Privacy
International that the UK's law enforcement and investigation
agencies are now making around a million requests a year to
telecoms companies and ISP's for telephone billing data, e-mail
logs, personal details of customers and records showing the
location where mobile phone calls were made.
The Interception of Communications Act 1985 has been the basis
of authority for such activity, together with a provision of the
Data Protection Act that gives exemptions for preventing or
detecting crime. Both regulations restrict the number of agencies
that have access to the information.
Unfortunately, this is now likely to change to allow access by
many more government agencies than simply those involved in law
enforcement.
The Interception of Communications Act is due to be replaced by
provisions of RIPA. This was due to happen last year, but the Home
Office was forced to withdraw the provisions following public
outrage at its attempt to give an even more extensive list of
public authorities access to this communications data.
The unprecedented access would have been available - as indeed
it is currently - without any judicial oversight.
The Home Office is now consulting over these issues before
taking further action, but the two consultation documents it has
published indicate that the current surveillance regime is likely
to become universal.
Footnote: Dr Chris Pounder was a consultant with Pinsent Masons until September 2008. He now runs a new training business, Amberhawk.
Disclaimer: We hope you find OUT-LAW’s content useful. It’s prepared by the lawyers at Pinsent Masons. Please remember, though, that it’s intended as general information only. It’s not legal advice. If that’s what you’re seeking, please
contact us. See also: our
full disclaimer
