The Hertfordshire Constabulary has been ordered to review the so-called ring of steel of ANPR cameras surrounding a market town in the English county.
Royston has seven ANPR cameras at six locations; no car can enter or leave the town without being seen by the cameras. Following an investigation by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), this has been deemed disproportionate.
Stephen Eckersley, the ICO’s head of enforcement, said in a press release: “It is difficult to see why a small rural town such as Royston, requires cameras monitoring all traffic in and out of the town 24 hours a day.” Any use of surveillance needs to be proportionate to the problem, he said, and the Hertfordshire Constabulary’s extensive use of ANPR cameras around Royston was not.
In its enforcement notice, the ICO said the police force should not use images from the cameras until its review has been completed.
The CCTV Code of Practice published this year says that public bodies must be able to justify the use of surveillance cameras. (See: Surveillance Code of Practice Published.) The ICO said the impact on the privacy of individuals entering and leaving the town of Royston has not been properly considered.
Eckersley said in the release:
We hope that this enforcement notice sends a clear message to all police forces, that the use of ANPR cameras needs to be fully justified before they are installed. This includes carrying out a comprehensive assessment of the impact on the privacy of the road using public.
The investigation followed a complaint by Big Brother Watch in June 2011. Nick Pickles, the group’s director, said in its press release that the ruling “sends a clear message” that blanket surveillance is unacceptable.
Yet again we find the public placed under surveillance when the police force was unable to justify why the surveillance was necessary or proportionate. Whoever took the decision to press ahead with this ring of steel and to ignore the law so brazenly should be clearing their desk today.
The Hertfordshire Constabulary has said it doesn’t intend to appeal the ruling. However, a spokesman for the police force told the BBC that it intends to continue using ANPR cameras, as they deliver “substantial policing benefits,” though it recognises the need to ensure that the deployment of such systems is recognised to be justified and proportionate.
No satisfactory explanation
The ICO said in its enforcement notice that the data controller had given “no satisfactory explanation” for the policy of covering the road network with ANPR cameras. The breaches of privacy were deemed to be in contravention of the Data Protection Act and the European Convention on Human Rights. The cameras “unlawfully interfered with” the right to respect for private and family life.
It will be interesting to see whether this enforcement notice represents a drawback for ANPR camera use in the UK or if they will continue to be deployed, though with much better thought out justifications from police and councils.
Related posts:
Free Download: The Video Surveillance Report 2023
Discover the latest developments in the rapidly-evolving video surveillance sector by downloading the 2023 Video Surveillance Report. Over 500 responses to our survey, which come from integrators to consultants and heads of security, inform our analysis of the latest trends including AI, the state of the video surveillance market, uptake of the cloud, and the wider economic and geopolitical events impacting the sector!
Download for FREE to discover top industry insight around the latest innovations in video surveillance systems.
interesting info, Rob, thank you… it would be interesting to see how this problem get solved… or sold to the public… this days I do not expect any privacy… anywhere… as nothing is private online or in life… but nothing is simple this days…