Automatic Number Plate Recognition System - Essay Example

Introduction It is not a pure coincidence that the introduction of new security laws (i.e. RIPA 2000, Data Protection Act 1998 and Article 8 Human Rights 1998) occurred in the latter part of the 20th century, along with the occurrence of milestone developments in human communication technologies. These breakthroughs in communication technologies enabled a manner of data exchange that is beyond the strict dissemination control by the primary data provider. One way or the other, such technological breakthroughs may have significantly fueled issues on individual privacy violations that resulted to the formation of relevant laws. Mean while, there are two main issues that root vis--vis the existence of privacy laws on one hand, and the security policies on the other. For one, there are ethical issues which attempt to uphold the individual rights to privacy. Another is the question on whether a security measure does not, in anyway violate, a particular individual rights. This paper presents an analysis of the ethical and legal issues involved in the implementation of Automatic Number Plate Recognition System (ANPR). Specifically, an analysis is given from the ethical and legal perspectives. Overview of the ANPR and the Core Issues Associated with It The Automatic Number Plate Recognition System (ANPR) is a security measure adopted in the UK vis--vis traffic control monitoring (National Policing Improvement Agency, 2009), yet extending its use to check on any illegalities associated with the use of a certain vehicle by enabling the machine to read and record 50 million plates a day (Adaptive Recognition Hungary, n.d.). This extension o its functionality brings forth questions on whether the implementation of the system is a violation of citizens' rights to privacy. With the ANPR system, authorities can check whether a vehicle is associated with a crime or other illegal activities, can acquire information regarding its owner's acquisition, and can lead to the vehicle's owner being linked to a case whenever illegalities regarding the acquisition and/ or use of the vehicle arise. While there are not any significant objections regarding the purpose of the use of the data, how authorities may safe-keep the data and ensure that data dissemination is legal is beyond the data owner's control and has become reasons of objections against the system's implementation. Analysis from the view of the UK Data Protection Law of 1998 Plate numbers are defined by the UK Data Protection Law of 1998 as private data (Information Commissioner's Office, n.d.). There are legal provisions that vary from the specific rights of the data owner, to the obligations of the data controller regarding data protection, etc. It may be helpful to note here a legal right of the data owner as provided for by the DPA 1998, which may be in conflict with how the authorities intend to use the data. The law states that the owner of data can request the halt of data processing when the act of it causes the owner a certain degree of distress. A review of the national security goals of the authorities justifying the implementation of the ANPR system makes it difficult to see how authorities would concede to requests by the data owner in reference to the cessation of data processing. For one, the use of data can extend to investigative purposes, which is pre-empted by the vehicle's inclusion to some crime or illegal activities. The subjects of investigation would always include the vehicle's owner, regardless of the fact if he has been directly involved or even aware of the vehicle's inclusion to a particular event. This results to a circumstance where an ordinary citizen, innocent of any crime, is being linked with the commitment of crime or illegal activity through a material possession. In cases wherein the owner is included among subjects to be investigated chances are, the individual right to request termination of data processing as provided for by the DPA 1998 is denied. This becomes more difficult when the system has faulty identification. Analysis from Article 8 of Human Rights Law The UK Human Rights Article 8 states that any access to a personal datum is legally permitted upon two premises: 1. when there is consent form the data owner; and 2. when the acquisition is aligned with the pursuit of national interest and security (Office of Public Sector Information, n.d.). With the case of the ANPR system, the implementation upholds the Human Rights Act provided that the authorities adhere to the legally defined usage and processing of data. The objective for using the ANPR system according to the authorities is to protect national interests in the course of strengthening measures for national security. The details of the Artcile 8 Human Rights 1998 justify this objective. To ensure the ANPR system's consistency with the DPA 1998, however, there should be adequate and efficient counter-measures to protect unauthorized use and access of data. Specifically, there should be controlled access in such a way that only a limited number of people and under specific circumstances can the data be accessed. One difficulty that may be encountered here is that there are no clear boundaries from the usage policies to allow strict definitions between acts out of mere curiosity and acts out of protecting the national interests. It remains upon the honesty of an authority to claim that data processing is done out of national interests and security. We go back again to the proposition a while ago that there should be clear circumstances wherein searches related to the vehicle data are allowed. Without this, privacy violation is highly probable as unwarranted searches can easily occur. Analyzing the Stakeholders Involved The implementation of the ANPR system involves three stakeholders: data owner (individual), data controller (authorities) and the collective or society. Among the three, only the authorities have explicit and direct benefits as the system allows them to have another channel to carry out their duty of protecting national interests and the data that they need become readily available. On the other hand, the individual as the owner receives zero benefits from the policy and has the highest probability of incurring harm. Meanwhile, the society is both benefitted and disadvantaged. The data controllers, although they have legal obligations when it comes to the handling and processing of data, are being cushioned for by reasons of 'protecting national interests'. Under the RIPA 2000, DPA 1998 and Article 8 of the Human Rights of 1998, these authorities have the right to collate personal and private data under the pursuit of national interests and security. Apart from that, they would just also have to comply with the legal requirements about data handling and processing, in which they simply have to ensure that all handling should be in accordance with their original objectives. The individual vehicle owners are at a great disadvantage here because it is their privacy that is being crossed, legally. In most cases, the organized collection of any personal data by a third party increases the data owners' vulnerability to unauthorized access and use of private data. This privacy threat is what causes a certain level of discomfort with the awareness of the fact that personal data are being organized and kept elsewhere. Lastly, the society is confronted with both pros and cons with the implementation of the ANPR system. The greatest benefit that comes with system implementation is the increased in national security, no matter how minimal the effects of the ANPR system may be in the long run. However, as the society is necessarily composed of individuals, then it is subjected on a collective sense to the cons experienced by the individuals. Alternative Methods The ANPR system has two primary functions: 1. It is used for evidence collection to provide strong support for any legal vindications; and 2. It is used to equip authorities with factual and physical material to justify validity of inferences that can prevent a certain crime or legal activity from occurring. The biggest challenge that the ANPR system deals with is how to ensure that safekeeping of data from unauthorized use and access. An alternative to this system would be to delegate security forces or traffic enforces on the roads, round the clock. Privacy is much more kept in-tact in this sense because the law enforcers would only have to review one's records upon an instance of violation. Additionally, there are no collections of data such as the CCTV data and the ANPR data and only data collected with relevance to instances of violations are collected. This comes limited though and it cannot provide the same amount of evidence that the ANPR system is able to provide. Conclusion The adoption of the ANPR system provides a certain sense of validity in saying that a society, being essentially shared by individuals of different interests would necessarily, in some respects, decrease the amount of private privacy being enjoyed by its citizens in its pursuit of higher national security. However, that privacy is not necessarily violated. This relationship is demonstrated in two ways: 1. Effective security measures entail a constant check-and-verification, a process which individuals have to deal with if they wanted a higher degree of security; and 2. as the society organizes its data collection to enforce stricter security measures, it increases its citizens' vulnerability to unauthorized access to private data. Furthermore, in the case of the ANPR system, technology is used to compensate for the shortcoming of individuals, manual security forces. As the nature of the ANPR system is essentially subsumed to human intelligence, the use of it calls for a constant defense against any security breach designed by the capacities of human intelligence. Only when it can ensure secure data handling and processing can it be without any legal violations. To a certain sense, it may be argued that any policy in lieu of protecting national interest and that which involves the violation of individual privacy is deemed legal only if it is able to enforce and ensure the highest security from unauthorized use and access of the private data which it holds and protects. By virtue of collecting private data, the state assumes responsibility and obligation of protecting whatever data is under its care. Bibliography Adaptive Recognition Hungary. 199. Automatic Number Plate Recognition. [Online] Available at: http://www.anpr.net/ [Accessed 13 March 2010]. Information Commissioner's Office.199-. Key Definitions of the Data Protection Act. [Online] Available at: http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_organisations/data_protection_guide/key_definitions_of_the_dpa.aspx [Accessed 13 March 2010]. National Policing Improvement Agency. 2009. Practice Advice on the Management and Use of Automatic Number Plate. [Online] Available at: http://www.acpo.police.uk/asp/policies/data/ANPR_genesis.pdf [Accessed 13 March 2010]. Office of Public Sector Information. 199-. Rights and Freedoms Article 8 Right to Privacy. [Online] Available at: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/ukpga_19980042_en_3 [Accessed 13 March 2010]. Read More