Met Police Scan 1.7 Million Faces, Regulation Lags Behind

The Metropolitan Police reported scanning over 1.7 million faces in London alone during the past twelve months. That figure represents an 87 % increase compared with the same period in 2025. The surge comes as retailers across the UK expand the use of AI‑driven cameras to deter shoplifting.

Biometrics commissioner Prof William Webster warned that effective legislation could take at least three years to materialise, even as about a dozen police forces already operate live facial‑recognition systems. He noted the technology’s falling cost and predicted its spread into static surveillance networks.

A whistleblower has alleged that some store employees deliberately added innocent shoppers to police watchlists, raising concerns about misuse beyond policing. Similar worries echo a recent case where a man was arrested for a burglary in a city he had never visited after the software confused him with another South‑Asian individual.

Oversight remains fragmented. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and the Equality and Human Rights Commission share responsibility, but the ICO’s planned audit of the Met’s use of the technology has been postponed indefinitely after the police requested delays. Critics describe the regulator as “toothless” and insufficiently aggressive.

Public sentiment is shifting. A poll of 2,000 adults found 57 % believe facial‑recognition systems push the UK toward a surveillance society, while 62 % fear wrongful trouble from the technology. Opposition to retailer‑run systems reaches nearly one‑third of respondents.

The Home Office is drafting a new legal framework, branding it the “biggest breakthrough for catching criminals since DNA matching.” Yet experts such as Dr Brian Plastow, Scotland’s biometrics commissioner, argue the technology is far less effective than police claim and that the current patchwork of laws leaves police “marking their own homework.”

What it means: Rapid deployment of facial‑recognition outpaces the slow build‑up of legal safeguards, creating a gap where misidentifications and potential abuse can occur unchecked. The next months will test whether the forthcoming regulator and legislative proposals can keep pace with the technology’s expansion.