Facial recognition technology must be implemented ethically, proportionately and with rigorous oversight.

Those were the thoughts of Facewatch’s own Fraser Sampson when he was recently interviewed on BBC Radio 5 Live.

Listen to the full interview above.

“A powerful crime-fighting tool”

British retail staff are subjected to over 2,000 incidents of violence or abuse per day (737,000 a year). The percentage of these attacks that involves a weapon is increasing. And yet just 2% result in a conviction. It’s statistics like these (from the 2025 edition of the British Retail Consortium’s Crime Survey) that help to explain the growing adoption of facial recognition technology – not just by retailers, but by police and law enforcement.

Criminals are constantly evolving in their use of technology to perpetrate crimes. As one 5 Live listener commented, why shouldn’t police be given the best chance to utilise technology too? For many people, the question isn’t if the police should be using facial recognition technology but how they should be using it.

A delicate balancing act

As Facewatch’s Professor Fraser Sampson argues, the key is to implement facial recognition technology correctly. Carefully. Considerately. There are legitimate concerns around a slow creep towards a surveillance state. But as the former Biometric Surveillance Camera Commissioner for the UK Government argues, it’s all about balance.

The use of DNA and fingerprinting in crime prevention is readily accepted; covered by very clear rules and independent oversight. The police are already using facial recognition technology – and they need to use it more. But it must be implemented ethically, proportionately and with rigorous oversight.