Privacy International

🆕 In a significant and forceful decision, the Information Commissioner's Office found that the UK Home Office’s GPS tagging of migrants arriving to the UK by small boats and other “irregular” routes was unlawful. Immigration authorities in the UK and elsewhere have been abusing migrants’ privacy in a bid to exercise performative power and control over a vulnerable population. Since January 2021, the Home Office has been placing migrants released on immigration bail under GPS ankle tagging, subjecting them to 24/7 surveillance. This results in vast amounts of highly sensitive, sometimes intimate, data being collected by immigration authorities. This policy was expanded to people arriving on small boats in 2022, in spite of efficacy, well-being and human rights concerns. We filed a complaint in August 2022 with the ICO alleging widespread and significant breaches of privacy and data protection law. Our complaint relied extensively on anonymous testimonies of individuals who recounted the debilitating impact that tagging was having on their private and family life, as well as physical and mental health. These were clients of Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID), Public Law Project, Duncan Lewis Solicitors Ltd., and Wilsons Solicitors London. The ICO concluded its investigation of our complaint, finding that the Expansion Pilot was unlawful, as it failed to comply with data protection law in a number of ways. It also issued a warning to the Home Office regarding all future data protection compliance of the whole GPS tagging scheme. Of huge significance, it found that the Home Office had failed to assess the systemic necessity and proportionality of tracking people’s 24/7 location, and additionally failed to take into account the fact that these may be people in vulnerable situations. A running thread seemed to emerge over the years throughout the Home Office’s policy, evident in the relentless deployment of invasive surveillance against migrants, signalling a further step in their criminalisation: migrants don’t deserve the same human rights and protections as British citizens. Today’s decision is a powerful reminder that migrants have the same data protection rights as everyone else. And a serious warning to immigration authorities in the UK and elsewhere, who have been abusing migrants’ privacy to exercise performative power and control, that they are not above the law. This isn’t the end, as data protection law is only a piece of the puzzle against absurd, racialised, costly and harmful anti-migrant policies. We are still awaiting judgment in two court cases. This is a significant win for all those who were subject to this vindictive, costly and cruel policy. It must be abandoned. Read our more detailed analysis: https://lnkd.in/gyidRdjY #privacy #surveillance #migration #humanrights

The UK Prime Minister (PM) recently announced his intention to expand the use of facial recognition technology (FRT) - but plans to increase biometric surveillance in the UK risk infringing fundamental human rights. The use of this authoritarian technology perpetuates existing racial inequalities and can lead to the over-policing of already marginalised and racialised communities, as highlighted by the UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism. Furthermore, the use of FRT by the police has already led to misidentifications and subsequent legal action has brought against the Metropolitan Police. The current and proposed use of FRT threatens the rights of communities that we should be seeking to protect and undermines the UK's legal obligation to protect and uphold human rights under international law. To this end, we co-signed a letter alongside 26 civil society organisations urging the PM to stop the planned expansion of the use of facial recognition technology. See the letter here: https://lnkd.in/e8gsqDJA

The 2024 Olympics have come to an end, but the intrusive AI video surveillance measures brought in to police the games are still in force. Back in March 2023, we challenged the new law regulating this at the French Constitutional Court, but the law is going ahead to authorise new experiments of AI surveillance until 2027 without appropriate safeguards. AI surveillance enables profiling of people according to physical attributes such as perceived gender and race, clothing style, gait, etc. - the next step in complete, discriminatory, arbitrary and abusive surveillance of public spaces. The risks? AI-driven identification may lead to unfair, discriminatory, or biased outcomes. People can be misclassified, misidentified, or judged negatively, and such errors or biases may disproportionately affect certain groups of people, including black and trans communities. Now the games are over, and the purpose for its deployment have come to an end, we hope to see France 🇫🇷 do the right thing and provide transparency around what happens to the data collected and the plan for rolling back such intrusive tech. Ultimately, we want to see these ‘experiments’ come to an end much sooner than 2027. Until then, we and others won’t let this go until human rights and democracy protections are properly applied. https://lnkd.in/eT259kRt #Olympics #Surveillance

US federal judge ruled that Google acted illegally to maintain its monopoly over online search. This is a big news for every internet user, here is why https://lnkd.in/dXNwg2QT Google search is the dominant online search engine with an estimated 90% of market shares. While this dominance can be explained by the quality of Google search (it "just works"), that's not the whole story... For years Google has paid billions of dollars to other companies such as Apple and Samsung to be set as the default search engine. So if you buy a new phone, chances are Google search will be the first thing you see opening a browser This is problematic for 2 reasons: 1/ it prevents competitors from capturing new market shares 🔒. If you've always been presented with Google search in a browser, you might not even realise there are other search engines like DuckDuckGo, Bing or Kagi. This becomes even more of a problem as search results are in part informed by users' behaviour. If a link is repeatedly clicked for a particular query, it should rank better. Less users means less data to improve your product 📉 2/ Google's empire is built on ads, including the ones that appear in Google search. By monopolising the online search market, they also control the distribution of ads on this market This has allowed Google to raise ad prices beyond reasonable rates in order to create greater profit - typical monopolistic behaviour 👹💰 In the end, it's users that pay the final price. Weak competition means less opportunities for better products and more chances of abusive practices such as lowering the bar for privacy protections. No remedy has been proposed yet, and Google intends to appeal the ruling. But this is a strongdecision that gives us hope that this behaviour is unacceptable Big tech companies have acquired too much power in online markets, at the expense of our privacy. Read more on our website: https://lnkd.in/eGQ8g6pN

Big data is supposed to revolutionise advertising, policing, the health sector, global development, and humanitarian relief. But unchecked, it is posing some serious dangers to your privacy. Learn more by watching our short video about big data: https://lnkd.in/e9rak9XE #BigData

The UK Government has announced it would explore an expansion of the use of facial recognition technology (FRT) by law enforcement across the UK. https://lnkd.in/eMpxRnXx We are concerned about this announcement because: 1. The use of FRT in the UK remains largely unregulated - there is no specific legislation that oversees its use by law enforcement. 2. FRT is highly intrusive. It can lead to indiscriminate mass surveillance, discrimination and the infringement of the rights to privacy, assembly and freedom of expression. 3. We know that UK MPs are already asleep at the wheel when it comes to the current deployment of FRT: - 70% of MPs do not know if FRT has been used in their constituency; - A quarter of MPs incorrectly believe that there is a UK law regulating the use of FRT 👉 https://lnkd.in/eaw2n6Gg Any use of this dystopian biometric technology in public spaces should be subject to robust public scrutiny and clear safeguards. But in the UK its not. 👉 https://lnkd.in/ews5jy6J Before any further deployment of FRT the government must take steps to regulate its use in order to prevent the end of privacy in public and protect people and their rights.

Yesterday, Keir Starmer, the UK Prime Minister, made an announcement concerning a new National Violent Disorder Programme which would consider an expansion of facial recognition technology. https://lnkd.in/eMpxRnXx This is particularly concerning in light of calls from Islington, Haringey and Newham councils to stop the use of live FRT in their districts. In its call, Islington Borough Council noted that FRT is "intrusive, unreliable and has the potential to be used disproportionately against Black, Asian and ethnic communities." https://lnkd.in/eAN5nwwW Despite these calls from communities to stop using live FRT, the announcement from the Prime Minister shows an intention to expand its use. If you're concerned about the use of FRT in your community, join us and write to your MP to find out more

Market and social research has always sought to help companies and governments map, understand, and predict our behavior. But companies and governments are now collecting sets of data that are so big that the field has changed entirely. Think about your regular store, the one where you shop most often and use a loyalty card at. A company can take its customer database, extract and analyse information on the purchasing habits of customers, and cross-reference that dataset with increasingly available data on income, property ownership, and age. In cross-referencing data sets like this, big data analytics are putting together pieces of data that in isolation is seemingly innocuous, but in combination produce a detailed picture with troubling accuracy, for everyone across all transactions, all communications and all movements. This is intelligence gathering on entire societies. And when the algorithms identify abnormal data in larger data sets, it can actively contribute to discrimination against specific groups or activities. https://pvcy.org/BigDataIm #BigData

Governments have the ability to hack personal devices. Once a device is hacked, a government can do any number of things. They can gain access to your emails, photos, browsing data, and contacts. They can even take control of your device: switching on mics and cameras without you knowing it. Very worryingly, a government can even delete, alter, or place content on a hacked device. It's dangerous to give any government that kind of power over our devices, and by extension, over us. https://pvcy.org/GovHackIm #GovernmentHacking

Join our partner Digital Rights Foundation tomorrow for an enlightening Instagram Live on Pakistan’s Privacy Landscape: Data Protection and Article 14! 🗓️ Thursday, 25th July 2024 🕛 12:00 pm PST 📍 Instagram 🔗 https://lnkd.in/dW_6XFEh They’ll be diving deep into crucial topics like: 🔐 Constitutional privacy and dignity in Pakistan 📜 Recent legal developments affecting privacy 💾 Data protection in the digital age ⚠️ Emerging online privacy threats, especially with GenAI 🛡️ Best practices for safeguarding your data Don’t miss out on this opportunity to engage, ask questions, and exchange ideas with experts.