Australian Federal Police and the Use of Facial Recognition Technology - Coursework Example

Research Policy Report: Australian Federal Police and the use of Facial Recognition Technology Name Institution Course Professor Date Introduction Police are currently facing new challenges as a result of many developments in the 21st century. Terrorism and cyber crime are becoming a serious security challenge for law enforcement agencies to effectively handle using the traditional policing methods. The governments have responded by creating new agencies that specifically deal with these new threats. Examples are counter-terrorism units, cyber-crime control units and anti-narcotics that have been established within the police service for purposes of dealing with the emerging threats to national security. It is important for a law enforcement agency to recognise and understand that the challenges are becoming enormous in an increasingly changing environment. In this way, they will be able to maintain their leadership in fighting this new agenda. This report discusses the use and adoption of facial recognition technology by Australian Federal Police (AFP) in the management of terrorism. Part A Australian Federal Police Terrorism is increasingly becoming an issue of great concern to law enforcement agencies all over the world. In Australia, terrorism has remained one of the major security challenges. A number of terrorist plots have been thwarted by Australian security agencies with coordination with other international partners. The methods that terrorists used are evolving thus presenting enormous task to the security forces. The counter-terrorism unit in the Australian Federal Police was formed to prevent, disrupt and carry out investigation into terrorist activities against the country (Australian Federal Police 2015). Furthermore, it also safeguards interests of Australia-both locally and internationally from threat of terrorist activities. Management of Terrorism by AFP The threats of terrorism have necessitated the Australian government to institute ways of managing the crime by integrating the use of technology. This is because terrorist activities are currently undertaken using sophisticated technologies in a manner that is unpredictable. The scales of terrorist attacks, its repeated occurrence in various locations that are unpredictable to Australian Police requires cooperation from all security agencies. The response from the Australian government since 2001 is successive new legislation that has greatly expanded the functions, roles and size of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) (Ransley & Mazerolle 2008, p. 04). The result is that the AFP possesses broad and expanded powers. In addition, various state and territory police have counter-terrorism units after their counter-terrorist functions were harmonised. The structural changes to the AFP has made policing of terrorism in the country to be more empowered by being more focused on preventing and provision of emergency response to terrorism threats (Ransley & Mazerolle 2008, p. 05). Use of Facial Recognition Technology by AFP The terrorist attack of September 11, 2001 in United States prompted countries to use technologies as means of countering terrorist attacks. In Australia, the AFP uses a range of technological innovations both at the border and inside the country in fighting terrorism. Biometric technologies are being used at the borders and facial recognition technologies are used at the airports as surveillance tools in the identification of potential terrorists and proper screening of persons (Wilson 2007, p. 207). Previously, biometric technologies were used for screening travellers, asylum seekers and welfare recipients. However, due to increased risk of terrorist attacks, biometric identification systems are used to cover the entire national population. AFP terms facial recognition technology (FRT) as ‘potential tool’ that links crime to criminals (Australian Federal Police 2012, p. 32). Facial recognition system has been embedded as a tool used in helping with investigations for purposes of countering terrorism. The system assists in the development of identity of suspects that were previously unknown to investigators of AFP and intelligence officers. The use of facial recognition technology is used as part of the National Identity Security Strategy with one of its key objectives being the enhancement of national interoperability of biometric identity (AFP 2012, p. 32). In fact, biometric technology is used at the Australian borders as a way of managing terrorism by the AFP. How AFP uses FRT The approach that AFP uses in combating terrorism is an integrated strategy. This is understandable given the nature of terrorism. AFP integrated strategy involves counter-terrorism investigations, community engagement, and strategies for countering violent extremism (AFP 2015, p. 06). In addition, the police involve itself in capacity building that leads to prevention and disruption of terrorism. In essence, the functions of the police are to prevent crime, investigate and prosecute (Choo, Smith, & McCusker 2007, p. 101). In order to prevent terrorism in Australia, AFP uses facial recognition technology by scanning images of people in their databases. Closed Circuit Television video footage provides these images as more and more cameras are being installed in the streets. The images relayed back by these cameras on the streets, airports and other places are scanned by facial recognition system of the AFP to identify and match suspected terrorists. Part 2 Reasons for Introduction of Face Recognition Technology Biometric and facial recognition system technologies have become important to operations of AFP in their fight against terrorism. The advent of facial recognition technology is a significant policing technology. Australia is among the pioneers of this technology and AFP has been quick to adopt it for purposes of assisting them in tracking terrorists. Facial technology is being introduced for a number of reasons. The criminal activities have increased and potential of terrorist attacks is more evident in each passing day. It is, therefore, important to identify suspected criminals before they can commit their intended crimes. Face recognition system helps in finding a suspect more quickly. Law enforcement agencies are empowered by face recognition technology because of its ability in searching and identifying suspects quickly even with incomplete identity information of the suspect(s) (Huang, Xiong, & Zhang 2005, p. 379). Moreover, the technology has the capability of producing results even with a sketch of the suspect given by a witness. This is possible because the system identifies individuals out of their own facial images. In a world that is more technologically advanced and interconnected, the use of surveillance technologies by law enforcement agencies is important. Surveillance applications technology like face recognition locates and identifies an individual without his knowledge (Day 2008, p. 78). In this way, a terrorist that AFP has been tracking down can be captured when the system positively identifies him or her in the airport, border or any other place without his or her awareness. AFP also introduces face recognition technology to automatically pick people that are contained in the terror watchlist. Furthermore, the technology is capable of checking multiple identities of terrorists in a simultaneous manner. Hence, the police are able to know when terror suspects are in Australia. In this case, AFP will be proactive in fighting crime and monitoring of criminal activities. This will be in line with the national counter-terrorism plan that outlines among other things the Australian strategic approach to terrorism. The plan recognises the need for preparedness, prevention, response and recovery (PPRR) from a terrorist act (National Counter-terrorism Committee 2012, p. 03). The counter-terrorism plan prioritises preparedness and being proactive in the fight against terrorism. It is for this reason that face technology has been introduced. Effectiveness of Face Recognition Technology Australian Federal Police assert that by adopting and using facial recognition technology, they will be able to prevent and deal with criminal activities especially terrorism. Although this is achievable, difficulty in obtaining good quality facial images of the criminals renders the performance of the technology low (Huang, Xiong, & Zhang 2005, p. 379). Therefore, criminals under surveillance will remain elusive to the police dragnet as poor quality images do not provide the concrete identity of a suspect. In this case, the system becomes ineffective as it offers false positives. The effectiveness of face recognition technology depends on factors such as photos quality, visibility of the individual in the photos and exact methodology being applied (Welinder 2012, p. 171). Due to its dependence on many factors, effectiveness of face recognition technology is limited. Every technological innovation has its own challenges as far as its usage is concern. Faces differ and changes in facial hair, body weight, and hairstyle can alter an individual face. Fingerprints stay the same forever, but human faces change. Facial recognition systems are affected by the above changes to a human face hence its effectiveness on correctly matching individuals on databases depends on the kind of changes that have occurred to these individuals faces. The differences in lighting, camera angle or camera itself have an effect on the system to correctly identifying people. Overall, face recognition technology only recognizes faces of individuals that have been added to the system in advance (Introna & Nissenbaum 2010, p. 03). Terrorists who have not been added to the system are not flagged off by the system hence escape police surveillance. In this case, facial recognition becomes ineffective. In general, this technology is not effective as it depends on many factors as discussed above for it to function properly and in the way it was intended to. Implications of Facial Recognition Technology on Fairness, Freedom and Privacy Facial recognition technology (FRT) functions by alerting law enforcement agencies to the presence of any suspected or known criminals or terrorists whose images are in the database. The critics of FRT points out that the technology compromise peoples’ privacy. The capturing of images by the video surveillance cameras is seen as an intrusion of citizens private lives. There is the threat of abuse of the technology by those tasked with manning the system. Using facial recognition in airports and other public places are dependent on the widespread video surveillance. This surveillance is intrusive as it records personal and private behaviour of people in graphic details (Monteleone 2012). Modern cameras can be put up anywhere and can easily view peoples’ faces from metres away. People tend to act in a different manner when being watched hence they possess the right to know when their identities, as well as their movements, are being captured. There is the issue of fairness and freedom as a result of using facial recognition system by law enforcement agencies in monitoring peoples’ movements. The question here is whether the FRT risks are borne disproportionately by or there is disproportionate flow of benefits to any subjects or a group of them. For example, certain systems achieve higher recognition rates to some groups than others- Africans, Asians over Whites and older people over young people. This raises a political suggestion that these systems do not fit into societies having egalitarianism aspirations (Introna & Nissenbaum 2010, p. 45). It is therefore possible that those groups with historical abuses are a subject of disproportionate scrutiny due to performance biases of FRT. This is not fair and is contrary to constitutional provisions that everybody should be treated fairly. As earlier stated, people act differently when they are being watched. In this case, the use of FRT imposes constraints on capacity of people to act and make some important decisions. This curtails their freedom to determine their own actions and decisions in accordance with what they believe and value. Conclusion The sophistication of criminal activities has necessitated law enforcement agencies to adopt the use of technologies. Police are tasked with the important role of maintaining law and order by safeguarding the lives and property of people. Terrorism has been on the rise and law enforcement agency such as Australian Federal Police has its work cut out. The organisation has adopted facial recognition technology as a surveillance tool in helping them track and arrest known terrorists suspects. The images of people captured by cameras on the streets and other places of interests to the police are scanned by facial recognition system of AFP to identify if any of the known suspect(s) matched the identities in their database. The use of this technology raises some privacy, fairness and freedom issues which need to be addressed for this technology to be in tandem with provisions of the law. AFP should consider adopting some or all of the recommendations below so that the use of FRT does not jeopardise any civil rights of people in the country. Recommendations FRT has a potential of being an important surveillance tool in the fight against terrorism. However, there are risks to privacy and civil rights that need to be safeguarded before this technology can be effective and work according to constitutional and legal provisions. The subjects should be aware that are being watched and their images are stored in the databases of the police and more importantly, they consent to it. Additionally, they should know that images are captured for identification purposes. Policies on access to these images should be thoughtfully determined and stated in an explicit manner for everybody to understand. FRT must be set to function in such a way that it is part of security and intelligence infrastructure. Moreover, authorities should have clear and realistic roles and capacities of the system. References Australian Federal Police 2012, Lessons Learned from Bali, retrieved 02 February 2015, < http://www.afp.gov.au/~/media/afp/pdf/p/platypus112.ashx. Choo, K. K. R., Smith, R. G., McCusker, R 2007, Future directions in technology-enabled crime: 2007-09, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra, Australia. Day, D 2008, ‘Biometric Applications Overview’, in SZ Li & AK Jain (eds), Handbook of face recognition, Springer, New York, pp.76-79. Huang, T, Xiong, Z, & Zhang Z 2005, ‘Face Recognition Applications’, in SZ Li (ed), Encyclopedia of Biometrics: I-Z, Volume 1, Springer, New York, pp. 370-389. Introna, L., & Nissenbaum, H 2010, Facial Recognition Technology A Survey of Policy and Implementation Issues, New York University, retrieved 04 February 2015, >http://www.nyu.edu/projects/nissenbaum/papers/facial_recognition_report.pdf Read More

Previously, biometric technologies were used for screening travellers, asylum seekers and welfare recipients. However, due to increased risk of terrorist attacks, biometric identification systems are used to cover the entire national population. AFP terms facial recognition technology (FRT) as ‘potential tool’ that links crime to criminals (Australian Federal Police 2012, p. 32). Facial recognition system has been embedded as a tool used in helping with investigations for purposes of countering terrorism.

The system assists in the development of identity of suspects that were previously unknown to investigators of AFP and intelligence officers. The use of facial recognition technology is used as part of the National Identity Security Strategy with one of its key objectives being the enhancement of national interoperability of biometric identity (AFP 2012, p. 32). In fact, biometric technology is used at the Australian borders as a way of managing terrorism by the AFP. How AFP uses FRT The approach that AFP uses in combating terrorism is an integrated strategy.

This is understandable given the nature of terrorism. AFP integrated strategy involves counter-terrorism investigations, community engagement, and strategies for countering violent extremism (AFP 2015, p. 06). In addition, the police involve itself in capacity building that leads to prevention and disruption of terrorism. In essence, the functions of the police are to prevent crime, investigate and prosecute (Choo, Smith, & McCusker 2007, p. 101). In order to prevent terrorism in Australia, AFP uses facial recognition technology by scanning images of people in their databases.

Closed Circuit Television video footage provides these images as more and more cameras are being installed in the streets. The images relayed back by these cameras on the streets, airports and other places are scanned by facial recognition system of the AFP to identify and match suspected terrorists. Part 2 Reasons for Introduction of Face Recognition Technology Biometric and facial recognition system technologies have become important to operations of AFP in their fight against terrorism.

The advent of facial recognition technology is a significant policing technology. Australia is among the pioneers of this technology and AFP has been quick to adopt it for purposes of assisting them in tracking terrorists. Facial technology is being introduced for a number of reasons. The criminal activities have increased and potential of terrorist attacks is more evident in each passing day. It is, therefore, important to identify suspected criminals before they can commit their intended crimes.

Face recognition system helps in finding a suspect more quickly. Law enforcement agencies are empowered by face recognition technology because of its ability in searching and identifying suspects quickly even with incomplete identity information of the suspect(s) (Huang, Xiong, & Zhang 2005, p. 379). Moreover, the technology has the capability of producing results even with a sketch of the suspect given by a witness. This is possible because the system identifies individuals out of their own facial images.

In a world that is more technologically advanced and interconnected, the use of surveillance technologies by law enforcement agencies is important. Surveillance applications technology like face recognition locates and identifies an individual without his knowledge (Day 2008, p. 78). In this way, a terrorist that AFP has been tracking down can be captured when the system positively identifies him or her in the airport, border or any other place without his or her awareness. AFP also introduces face recognition technology to automatically pick people that are contained in the terror watchlist.

Furthermore, the technology is capable of checking multiple identities of terrorists in a simultaneous manner. Hence, the police are able to know when terror suspects are in Australia. In this case, AFP will be proactive in fighting crime and monitoring of criminal activities.

Read More