Quickly exit this site by pressing the Escape key Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
Super, Recognisers, Identifications, Increase, Decrease, Employed, Facial, Criminal, Investigations, Detection, Data, Protection, Act, Interference, European, Convention, Human, Rights, University, Greenwich, Employees.
PUB 1294
16314
Super-Recognisers
2018 to 2020
I am writing to submit a Freedom of Information request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in relation to the use of 'super-recognisers' by your police force.
I would be grateful if you could please provide me with answers to all the questions below:
1. If your police force uses 'super-recognisers', what is the total number of identifications they made in the year 2020?
2. Was there an increase or decrease (and by how many) in the number of super-recognisers employed by your police force after August 2018?
3. Does your police force believe that the facial identification process carried out by 'super-recognisers' for the purposes of criminal investigations or crime detection satisfies the definition of processing under the Data Protection Act 2018? If not, why not?
4. Does your police force believe that the facial identification process carried out by 'super-recognisers' for the purposes of criminal investigations or crime detection amounts to an interference with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights? If not, why not?
Full disclosure
28 October 2021
17 November 2021
N/A
Having completed enquiries within Essex Police in respect of Section 1(1)(a), Essex Police does hold information relating to your request, Essex Police can confirm in respect of Section 1(1)(b) the following data:
Caveat: The data is correct as at 28 October 2021.
1. If your police force uses 'super-recognisers', what is the total number of identifications they made in the year 2020?
Essex Police does not use 'super-recognisers'. In 2015/2016, Essex Police worked with the University of Greenwich to identify if any of their employees who volunteered to be tested were ‘Super Recognisers’. A number were identified, however, the programme never took off and stopped in 2016/2017.
2. Was there an increase or decrease (and by how many) in the number of super-recognisers employed by your police force after August 2018?
Not applicable.
3. Does your police force believe that the facial identification process carried out by 'super-recognisers' for the purposes of criminal investigations or crime detection satisfies the definition of processing under the Data Protection Act 2018? If not, why not?
Although FOI legislation provides the public a right of access to recorded information, public authorities are not obliged to provide comment or answer questions nor is there a requirement to create information for the purpose of answering questions. Essex Police, therefore, will not comment on whether the facial identification process carried out by 'super-recognisers' for the purposes of criminal investigations or crime detection satisfies the definition of processing under the Data Protection Act 2018.
4. Does your police force believe that the facial identification process carried out by 'super-recognisers' for the purposes of criminal investigations or crime detection amounts to an interference with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights? If not, why not?
Although FOI legislation provides the public a right of access to recorded information, public authorities are not obliged to provide comment or answer questions nor is there a requirement to create information for the purpose of answering questions. Essex Police, therefore, will not comment on whether the facial identification process carried out by 'super-recognisers' for the purposes of criminal investigations or crime detection amounts to an interference with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.