SAN FRANCISCO — Many people use facial recognition technology to unlock their phones, but a move to allow law enforcement to use the same technology for public safety is drawing criticism from some. who are activists.
This is a debate about the public’s right to privacy. Facial recognition technology is used every day by millions to access private data on phones and apps. The use of this technology by law enforcement to solve crimes in California is prohibited until a moratorium on the practice expires on January 1 of this year.
Despite public support for that moratorium, it does not have enough support under the current California legislature. A new bill introduced in the California legislature seeks to place narrow parameters on how law enforcement can use the technology.
But activist Nathan Sheard warned that any use of facial recognition in law enforcement could infringe on a person’s right to privacy.
“Really, there’s no way to separate the harm and risk of the government’s use of facial recognition from the use of the technology at all,” Sheard told CBS News Bay Area in an interview.
Sheard has been an activist and organizer for more than a decade. His latest battle is to preserve the right to privacy, especially for peaceful protesters. He argued that the proposed legislation could open the door to intimidate people from exercising their constitutional freedom of speech and assembly rights.
“If you are in a park with a few thousand people, there is anonymity there without the government’s use of facial recognition; that you can listen to voices and messages that may be controversial without fear that you will be recognized in front of you ‘re even aware,” he explained. “There is no facial recognition technology, you have that which is not recognized. It will definitely deter people.”
Sheard currently works at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, where he helps push legislation that protects people’s right to privacy. He said the proposed policy removes a person’s right to refuse even if they haven’t committed a crime.
Under the law, the technology must be set at 98% accuracy – the highest level of accuracy available. But Sheard says even a 2% chance of not being identified is enough to instill fear.
“It’s more of a concern than an officer walking up to someone on the street and asking for their identification, because it doesn’t happen in a way that you know it’s happening,” Sheard explained.
Under Assembly Bill 642, law enforcement can use facial recognition as an aid to investigations while prohibiting its use as the sole reason for an arrest or search warrant.
The bill’s sponsor — Assemblymember Phil Ting — promoted the initial ban on police use of facial recognition technology. He agreed that a moratorium on the technology would be ideal, but said a full ban does not have enough support to pass under the current state legislature.
“There is no regulation, which is the Wild West. So any law enforcement agency can do whatever they want, but law enforcement agencies, one by one,” he told CBS News Bay Area . “This way, there is a set of best practices in the state.”
Ting represents San Francisco, which is one of four California cities to ban the use of facial recognition by police. Berkeley, Oakland and Alameda followed. He said the bill includes protections for people exercising their first amendment rights.
“That footage from the body camera cannot be used for facial recognition for an arrest,” explained Ting. “So any time you’re, you know, just a witness to a crime any time you’re exercising your constitutional rights, that facial recognition footage can’t be used against you.”
Sheard argues that it’s a slippery slope, especially for minorities and undocumented people who he says can be reprimanded for participating in public protests, and ultimately force people to think about twice before speaking.
