# FILE NAME: 00000863.soc
# TITLE: Should we allow the government to use facial recognition technology on the general public? [7d993b2a79209760c1b5c3ec13becea1]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 4
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - “Facial recognition technology can be a useful tool for fighting crime, but its use should be carefully regulated. Facial recognition should not be used indiscriminately or by anyone other than the police and it should not be used in cases other than the most serious crimes and it should be used only when no other way to obtain information is available. Authorisation for its use should be highly regulated with checks and balances to prevent abuse or mistakes. In an emergency situation, it should be possible for officers to bypass the usual authorisation process and use the system, but that information should be made available to all parties afterwards and should be used only if other means of getting information are not available”
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - Facial recognition technology can be useful in the fight against crime and terrorism. The police should be allowed to use this technology to identify potential criminals, however only if strict conditions are met, as misuse of facial recognition technology could lead to breaches of data privacy and the infringement of civil liberties. The people and the general public must also be given the chance to have their say, and must not be subject to the use of facial recognition without their permission. The government also has an important responsibility to regulate this technology so that it does not fall into the hands of hackers and is not subject to abuse. Only with regulation and public oversight will this technology work for the good of society, as opposed to becoming a sinister tool which works against the general public.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - “Facial recognition technology can be useful in the fight against crime and terrorism. The government needs to balance the potential benefits and risks. Use of facial recognition should be subject to strict regulation and be limited to cases where public safety is a legitimate concern. Everyone should be entitled to a private life. A policy of responsible disclosure of images should be implemented and unnecessary collection and retention of images should be avoided. Before new surveillance powers are granted, the government should provide independent proof that there are no effective alternatives, demonstrate that the proposal would not impact on civil liberties and that appropriate safeguards are in place. The Independent Surveillance Camera Commissioner and Information Commissioner’s Office must also be able to oversee the operation of this system. Legislation needs to ensure the public, Parliament, the police and the courts are all informed about the extent of powers and surveillance. Safeguards must be in place to ensure the authorities do not violate the privacy of innocent people and data protection laws need to be stronger.”
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - “Facial recognition can be very useful in identifying suspected criminals and terrorists and can also be useful in public safety in general. This can allow us to know the location of any terrorists. The dangers of facial recognition are privacy and civil liberty concerns and it could also be misused to access private information such as our medical records or shopping preferences. It would also be difficult for the police and government to access all of the data on private CCTV cameras and ensure the information is not misused. Facial recognition technology is likely to be more and more advanced in the future, so if we do not start the regulation process now, it will be too late. We should set strict regulation on how facial recognition can be used by the government, police, businesses etc. We would also recommend that facial recognition is only used on people of interest in cases of serious crime or terrorism, so that privacy is not infringed. Finally we recommend that all use of facial recognition by the government is made transparent and open to public scrutiny. Only by allowing all these conditions, can the public feel safe using the latest facial recognition technology.”
2: 3,4,2,1
1: 4,3,2,1
1: 2,4,3,1
1: 3,1,2,4