The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

ICO lets police maintain ANPR location secrecy

Failed to comply, but no action needed

Agentless Backup is Not a Myth

The Information Commissioner's Office has decided against forcing police to disclose the locations of vehicle tracking cameras.

The ICO said that Devon and Cornwall Police was correct in refusing to provide the locations of automatic numberplate recognition cameras (ANPR) that it ran in its area following a Freedom of Information request by Kable.

However, in a decision notice published on 23 September 2010, it said the force had failed to comply with procedural requirements of the request in refusing to publish the information. "The public interest was addressed in a generalised fashion, rather than separately in relation to each of the exemptions cited," it says. However, the force will not have to take any further action.

The ICO said the existence and extent of police ANPR cameras, which store the numberplates of vehicles passing for two years, "is of considerable significance to the balance of the public interest," and that the nationwide development of the system does raise questions about the surveillance implications.

But it adds that there is another element of public interest in the police not revealing the location of the cameras in order to prevent crime and apprehend offenders. It says the two public interest arguments are "finely balanced" with "very significant weight both for and against disclosure".

It said that because coverage of the road network is not comprehensive, and that disclosing the locations of cameras in Devon and Cornwall – which its staff have seen – would make it easier for potential offenders to avoid the areas and concentrate on those not covered.

While accepting that many ANPR cameras are clearly visible, and some of their locations may become known over time, the ICO said that it would be difficult for someone trying to avoid the cameras to be certain that they knew of all locations on a given route.

Devon and Cornwall Police has reconsidered its initial refusal to answer one question in the original Freedom of Information request. It told Kable that it holds no information on the locations of CCTV cameras with ANPR functionality that it uses. Some police forces draw ANPR data from cameras run by other organisations such as councils, but the answer suggests that Devon and Cornwall Police does not.

The ICO took a year and a day to come to its conclusion, Kable having disputed the force's refusal to disclose the information on 22 September 2009.

On 5 July, home secretary Theresa May ordered greater regulation of police ANPR systems, and is considering making them more transparent to the public.

This article was originally published at Kable.

Kable's GC weekly is a free email newsletter covering the latest news and analysis of public sector technology. To register click here.

Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Backup/Recovery

The difference between law enforcement and surveillance.

Automatically reading a numberplate and checking if the vehicle in question is taxed, insured, isn't stolen and doesn't have any other markers associated with it. That's law enforcement.

Automatically reading a numberplate and storing a record of where and when the vehicle was seen for two years. That's surveillance.

The first is acceptable, the second isn't.

11
0

One branch of government covering another's a*se

This sort of activity causes the government to be held in contempt, as well as the police and the ICO.

It simply highlights that the police think they are above the law and the ICO is confirming it.

9
1

"potential offenders"

"would make it easier for potential offenders to avoid the areas and concentrate on those not covered."

That's the nub really. In better times, it was assumed that people were inocent until found to be guilty of sometrhing, so they were trusted to go about their own business without snooping by the state.

Now, everyone is a "potential offender" - guilty but not yet caught, or yet to commit one of the ever expanding list of crimes. So that makes it OK to monitor and track everyone 24/7 and keep records so that you can crack down on the scum if they ever think of stepping out of line.

It will end in tears, mark my (anonymous) words...

3
0

More from The Register

 breaking news
Number of cops abusing Police National Computer access on the rise
Only a telegram from the Queen can get you off it
 breaking news
NSA whistleblower to tech firms, Obama: 'Grow a pair!'
Ed Snowden: Email tracking grabs 'IPs, raw data, content, headers, attachments, everything'
NSA: We COULD track you by your phone ... if we WANTED to
Honestly, too much work, can't be bothered
 breaking news
Julian Assange: I'm quite happy to sleep on Ecuador's sofa FOREVER
Wikileaker won't leave London embassy even if Sweden no longer wants him
Google flings another £1m at online child sex abuse vid CRACKDOWN
See, see, we're trying, ad giant tells Daily Mail UK.gov
 breaking news
NSA PRISM-gate: Relax, GCHQ spooks 'keep us safe', says Cameron
Whatever they are up to, it's all above board, we're told
PRISM snitch claims NSA hacked Chinese targets since 2009
Snowden suddenly looks safer in Hong Kong after revelations
SCO vs. IBM battle resumes over ownership of Unix
Zombie lawsuit back and wants to suck the brains out of Linux
 breaking news
Google mounts legal challenge to surveillance gag orders
Argues free speech trumps security secrecy