SCOTLAND needs to develop new legislation around policing that is fit for purpose in the digital age, according to leading academics researching the increased use of technology by Police Scotland.
The calls come ahead of a Scottish Institute for Policing Research (SIPR) conference this week that will look at the increasing digital dimensions to policing and the ethical challenges emerging as a result.
Dr Elizabeth Aston, director of SIPR – a consortium which bridges academia with policing and aims to ensure there is research informed practice – said current legislation was “not fit for purpose” in the digital era.
The rapid increase in the use of tech – from cyber kiosks to body cameras and facial recognition software – has attracted serious privacy concerns from human rights and civil liberties organisations.
Police Scotland introduced trials of cyber kiosks – laptop-sized machines to allow police access to targeted data from digital devices such as mobile phones – last year.
Aston said those concerns showed the need for the Scottish Government to draw up fresh guidance to ensure trust in the police was maintained.
She said: “Whether it’s mobile phones, or body cameras or reporting crime online, technology is increasingly part of the public’s interaction with policing.
“When it comes to technology, it’s still about this balance between trying to ensure safety and security on a societal level and also trying to ensure individual freedoms and human rights are protected.”
She continued: “That’s an issue when it comes to any police powers.
“The existing legislation is not fit for purpose and needs updated to be useable in a digital era.
“You have case law for example that looks at someone’s diary being looked at [by police] but how different is that from someone’s mobile phone which basically has everything about someone’s life on it?”
READ MORE: Scottish Police watchdog found that Taser use was justified
Aston, who is also chair of the of the external reference group on cyber kiosks, revealed the group had recently recommended to the Scottish Government that new legislation was introduced.
Their report followed concerns raised by the Scottish Human Rights Commission, Open Rights Group and Privacy International in the last year about their use.
In response to concerns they might be unlawful, Police Scotland has put in place improved procedures, which Aston said were welcome.
Yet she believes additional steps at government level are also necessary.
It is understood the proposals were discussed by ministers last week.
SIPR’s digital policing conference on Tuesday will look at other ethical issues associated with the increase in technology, including the need for continued local and community policing to maintain public confidence.
Aston added: “You need good community policing that is about engagement and building relationships over a longer period in order for them to be able to use technology to report crime, or engage in an online space.
“The criminal justice system relies on people being willing to come forward to report crime or as a witness and without that it can’t function really at all.”
She claimed while Police Scotland was currently less reliant on technology than many other forces in the UK and beyond, it was all the more important that accountability and transparency measures – as well as new legislation – were introduced now. Police Scotland has not yet started testing facial recognition but has ambitions to do so, prompting the Open Rights Group to call for proper oversight to be put in place first.
Aston said: “People often say that Police Scotland is quite behind in terms of technology – body-worn cameras are common place in a lot of other UK police forces, for example.
“But I see that as providing an opportunity for police in Scotland to look at the evidence and reflect on what has gone on elsewhere and learn from the success stories and mistakes around how it was introduced.”
Other issues due to be raised at the conference include online state surveillance, which has prompted growing concern in recent years following papers leaked by US whistleblower Edward Snowdon, which showed that the National Security Agency was spying on American citizens.
READ MORE: MSPs told of plans for police biometrics watchdog position
Dr Megan O’Neill, a researcher in policing at Dundee University, said the public had lots of questions around trust in security agencies involved in state-level surveillance.
But she claimed there were often misconceptions about what information agencies could access.
“There is not a great level of awareness from the public,” she said. “Security agencies do not have complete carte blanche.
“There is a real need for accountability, but we can build trust if the state can be more transparent.
“I appreciate that some things need to be kept secret but we need more transparency about their methods and the limitations.”
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “It is for the SPA and Police Scotland to ensure that they exercise their powers always in accordance with Scottish law.
“Earlier this year, the Justice Secretary confirmed an independently chaired advisory group which will consider whether there are any potential implications arising from new and emerging technological developments in law enforcement.
“Preparatory work is now in hand and further announcements will be made in the new year.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here