Police to get more data powers despite Sarah Everard records breach
The Data use and Access (DUA) Bill will have its second reading in the House of Lords today. Peers will debate removing safeguards to how the police access, share and use data, days after a Met police officer was sacked for inappropriately accessing files relating to Sarah Everard.
Removal of safeguards for accessing data
Clause 81 of the Bill will remove safeguards that compel police to provide a reason for accessing and disclosing records, meaning that data abuses by police officers could go uncovered.
On Friday, a Metropolitan police officer was sacked for inappropriately accessing files relating to Sarah Everard. In addition, the Met revealed that in total: “104 officers and staff (68 officers and 36 staff members) were initially identified as potentially accessing files relating to the investigation without a legitimate policing purpose.” Over two thirds of these cases required action by the police.
Removing restrictions on data sharing
The DUA Bill also lowers accountability over how data is shared and accessed for law enforcement and other public security purposes. Schedules 4 and 5 remove the requirement to consider the legitimate expectations of the individuals whose data is being processed. This means that data the public share with eg the NHS could be used by the police or government departments such as DWP or the Home Office. Making it easier for the police to get data held by other organisations while reducing accountability and traceability over how they access information risks further eroding trust in law enforcement authorities.
Removing protections from automated decision-making
The Bill will remove the right to have a human review a decision based on solely automated processing that has a legal or otherwise significant effects on someone’s life. In the past, this right has protected workers from unfair wage deductions, unfair dismissals and from being unfairly disadvantaged by their credit scoring. AI and automated decision-making are increasingly being used by the police despite fears that they will exacerbate existing discrimination within the criminal justice system. It is therefore vital that strong safeguards are in place, particularly as decisions can have outcomes that could impact someone for the rest of their life.
Jim Killock, Executive Director, at the Open Rights Group said:
“The Met investigated over 100 staff over the inappropriate accessing of information in relation to Sarah Everard. This shows the police can and do act to access information inappropriately. This is likely the tip of the iceberg. There may be less prominent cases, where police abuse their power by accessing information without worry for the consequences.
“Against this, the government needs to explain why it wants to actively remove accountability measures for accessing public data while at the same time removing other safeguards and protections.
“We need more, not less transparency and accountability over how, why and when the police access, process and share data about the public. Reducing restrictions risks worsening existing tensions between police and the communities they claim to serve.”
BRIEFING ON THE DATA USE AND ACCESS BILL
Open Rights Group briefing outlining all of our concerns with the Bill
Find out more