Mean while, there are two main issues that root vis--vis the existence of privacy laws on one hand, and the security policies on the other. For one, there are ethical issues which attempt to uphold the individual rights to privacy. Another is the question on whether a security measure does not, in anyway violate, a particular individual rights. This paper presents an analysis of the ethical and legal issues involved in the implementation of Automatic Number Plate Recognition System (ANPR). Specifically, an analysis is given from the ethical and legal perspectives.
The Automatic Number Plate Recognition System (ANPR) is a security measure adopted in the UK vis--vis traffic control monitoring (National Policing Improvement Agency, 2009), yet extending its use to check on any illegalities associated with the use of a certain vehicle by enabling the machine to read and record 50 million plates a day (Adaptive Recognition Hungary, n.d.). This extension o its functionality brings forth questions on whether the implementation of the system is a violation of citizens' rights to privacy. ...
Analysis from the view of the UK Data Protection Law of 1998
Plate numbers are defined by the UK Data Protection Law of 1998 as private data (Information Commissioner's Office, n.d.). There are legal provisions that vary from the specific rights of the data owner, to the obligations of the data controller regarding data protection, etc. It may be helpful to note here a legal right of the data owner as provided for by the DPA 1998, which may be in conflict with how the authorities intend to use the data. The law states that the owner of data can request the halt of data processing when the act of it causes the owner a certain degree of distress.
A review of the national security goals of the authorities justifying the implementation of the ANPR system makes it difficult to see how authorities would concede to requests by the data owner in reference to the cessation of data processing. For one, the use of data can extend to investigative purposes, which is pre-empted by the vehicle's inclusion to some crime or illegal activities. The subjects of investigation would always include the vehicle's owner, regardless of the fact if he has been directly involved or even aware of the vehicle's inclusion to a particular event. This results to a circumstance where an ordinary citizen, innocent of any crime, is being linked with the commitment of crime or illegal activity through a material possession. In cases wherein the owner is included among subjects to be investigated chances are, the individual right to request termination of data processing as provided for by the DPA 1998 is denied. This becomes more difficult when the system has faulty