Facial recognition: Fedpol acquires controversial software

It happens at night in an underpass. A man dressed in dark attacks a woman. He threatens her with a knife and robs her. The woman filed a police report. This protects the images from a security camera. It shows the face of the perpetrator. It’s the only clue.

With the current technological possibilities, this surveillance image alone does not get any further in the investigation. Because the photo cannot be compared with the national police file. Nowadays, searches can only be made here by name or fingerprints. However, the software does not offer facial recognition.

That’s going to change. The Federal Council has approved a CHF 25 million loan to modernize one of the Federal Police’s main systems, Fedpol. It has a convoluted name: Automated Fingerprint Identification System, or Afis for short. The official term is misleading. Because the database not only stores fingerprints, but also a million facial images of 400,000 people.

These are the photos of all the suspects recently “identified” in the criminal process. These are the typical cop shots you see in crime novels: one shot from the front, one from the side, and sometimes a third. In the case of criminals, the images are kept for a maximum of thirty years. The recordings of all registered asylum seekers are also stored in the police file. These remain available for two years.

With the “Afis 2026” project, Fedpol is now acquiring software that will allow it to search this database using facial recognition technology.

Fedpol explains in a YouTube video how the manhunt in the fictitious case of the robbery described above will be conducted in the future. The software compares the security camera photo with the Afis database. The system returns several hits.

A team of police experts check the list of possible suspects and find the robber they’re looking for – that’s the idea in the promotional video. The Fedpol thriller ends with a happy ending. A voice-over explains that it can also solve other crimes: terrorism, kidnapping or credit card abuse.

The fear of the surveillance state

On the one hand, Fedpol advertises how important the technology will be for the criminal hunt of the future. On the other hand, the police also emphasize that they will only use the technological potential to a very limited extent. Because the outcry over alleged facial recognition technology at SBB train stations has made the media atmosphere in the country clear. The fear of excessive surveillance as in China immediately pops up.

Fedpol’s PR strategists are therefore trying out a linguistic trick. In a press release, they claim that they would not introduce facial recognition at all, only facial recognition.

This means that photos are only compared to the Afis police database, but not to other sources. Not with the database of identity cards and passports. Not with pictures on social media. And also not with live surveillance, for example rotating cameras at airports or border crossings.

A face match also works with facial recognition technology. The face is measured and presented as a grid of data points. It is therefore simply wrong to claim that it is not about facial recognition. Correct is: a facial comparison is an application form of it.

Fedpol also claims in the statement that facial recognition systems are “prohibited by law” in Switzerland anyway. That is also wrong. There is no prohibition. However, there is no legal basis for further use than planned.

When asked, a Fedpol spokesperson admitted that the chosen wording was incorrect. The communication error of the communications department shows the nervousness of the authorities on this subject.

This actually has a reason. Because the legal bases for the project are there, but they are weak. There is only one Federal Council ordinance from 2013, which gives some vague specifications.

Professor of criminal law argues for a legal basis

Monika Simmler is a professor of criminal justice at the University of St. Gallen and specializes in facial recognition. She qualifies the planned face comparisons as a serious violation of fundamental rights, because personal data are processed that deserve special protection. “A general authorization at ordinance level is not sufficient for this,” she says. The legal bases are too general.

Simmler advocates a regulation at the legislative level, also for reasons of democratic politics. Then the limits of the planned facial recognition system would have to be clarified in a political debate and can no longer be determined by the Federal Council alone.

The expert also praises the federal government’s communications. Until now, it was unclear whether it is legally correct that some cantons are already using facial recognition technology for investigations. This question is now clarified.

“From a legal point of view, it is gratifying that the Federal Council is clearly stating that all other uses of facial recognition technology by the state have no legal basis and are therefore illegal,” she says. This takes the wind out of the sails of the cantonal police forces that are already working with it. Use is only allowed by Fedpol.

In the US, the police can go much further

With software purchasing, Switzerland introduces something neighboring countries have been doing for a long time. Similar systems are already in use in Germany, Austria and France.

But there are also democratic countries that go much further. Cameras are in use in England that perform live facial recognition. In the United States, many states allow police to use facial recognition technology to also match suspicious photos to databases of driver’s licenses and ID cards. More than 64 million Americans are affected.

If, on the other hand, there is a surveillance photo of the perpetrator of a crime in Switzerland, the police must be in luck. You can only move forward if the person you are looking for is already known to the police. Unlike the FBI, the ID database containing the passport photos of all 8.7 million residents is not allowed in.

Should the police also search for photos on social media?

FDP security politician Maja Riniker says: “Personally, I think the police should have more options to use facial recognition.” Detectives should also be able to search social media, she says. She’s very pragmatic: “If you don’t want to, don’t upload pictures of yourself.”

In very serious cases, she would also advocate allowing police to use facial recognition video surveillance cameras on public property for a limited time.

However, she assumes that these concerns are currently not majority fit. “I have the impression that society has become more critical of the state since the corona measures,” she says. The narrow yes to the PMT anti-terror law has also shown that further measures currently stand little chance.

The success rate has risen to over 99 percent

However, with advancements in technology, this may change in the future. Ten years ago, a facial match with good quality photos identified less than 80 percent correctly. That led to criticism. In criminal proceedings, one person would be falsely suspected in every fifth case. The success rate is now over 99 percent.

However, the recognition of dark faces remains a problem. These are identified less reliably than clear ones. The darker the skin, the more problems the software has. This is mainly because a very dark skin color has the same effect as an underexposed photo: the contours are more difficult to see. However, the programs have also improved in this respect. The difference in identifying dark and light faces is only marginal.

Fedpol also cites the improvement in technology as the reason for the planned introduction. Now the time is ripe for this in Switzerland as well.

(aargauerzeitung.ch)