Interviews

Welcome for CCTV code

by Mark Rowe

Frank Crouwel, Managing Director, NW Systems Group, welcomes the new Surveillance Camera Code but worries it creates potential for delay in adoption of ‘intelligent’ CCTV cameras in the UK.

One of the most significant pieces of news for the UK surveillance world has been the appointment of a new Surveillance Camera Commissioner Andrew Rennison back in September 2012 and the subsequent publication, in February, of a draft Surveillance Camera Code of Practice under section 29 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The Act promises ‘further regulation of CCTV’ as surveillance technologies improve and potentially threaten rights to privacy. Consultation on the draft Code closed in March.

The new code needs to be seen in the context of law including the Human Rights Act 1998 and Article 8 of the oft-quoted European Convention on Human Rights. A person’s right to ‘respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence’ is guarded by vocal civil liberties groups and anti-CCTV campaigners such as Big Brother Watch.

You might expect NW Systems to object to further regulation of a market which we rely on for all our sales and installation work. In fact we took a long look at the 12 guiding principles of surveillance camera systems which form the heart of the new code and found it hard to argue with any. The reverse in fact: we believe that if these principles are honoured by system commissioners, installers and operators alike; this would strengthen the case for CCTV usage in public places. The 12 principles demand the following of public place surveillance camera and ANPR systems in England and Wales:
1) They must have a ‘legitimate aim’ and be responding to a ‘pressing need’.
2) They should take into account the privacy of the individual and periodically review whether this is being properly protected.
3) They must have a published contact point for access to information held (see Freedom of Information Act 2000) and be able to direct complaints towards this point of contact.
4) They must state clear responsibility and accountability for all surveillance camera system activities including image and information collected, held and used.
5) A surveillance system’s rules, policies and procedures need to be in place before it is installed. These need to be communicated with all parties that need to comply with them.
6) No images and information should be stored longer than is strictly required for their stated purpose. Images should be deleted once they have served their purpose.
7) Access to retained images and information should be restricted. Clear rules must be laid out defining who can gain access to surveillance images and for what purpose.
8) System operators should define operational, technical and competency standards relevant to a system and work to meet and maintain these standards.
9) Operators must avoid unauthorised access to and use of images.
10) Operators must review a system’s usage regularly to ensure legal requirements, policies and standards are being complied with.
11) ‘Pressing need’ and ‘legitimate aims’ include support of public safety and law enforcement with the aim of gathering images and information which is of evidential value in a court of law in the event of an alleged crime.
12) Where operators of surveillance camera systems are using reference databases to check image content (facial matching or ANPR) they need to ensure the complete accuracy of that database.

On a first reading the new code seems little changed from the last iteration published back in 2008. But there are two distinct differences in the fine detail. Firstly, something that Andrew Rennison himself is championing, is the new concept of ‘surveillance by consent’ which follows the principle laid down for policing, that is, surveillance should only be deployed where people agree that it serves a purpose to enhance public safety, prevent crime or help catch the perpetrators of crime.

Transparency and accountability become the watch words. Authorities will have to explain why they have put surveillance cameras in a public place; explain how they are managing (and disposing of) the resulting images and metadata and also be prepared to articulate what the perceived crime threat is in this given area.

The code also implies the potential for specific standards to be drawn up for more advanced surveillance systems such as ANPR, video analytics and facial recognition systems. It is unclear exactly what those standards might be beyond the stipulation laid out in principle12 but this is definitely one for some of the high-end camera manufacturers and analytics software providers to watch. There is an increasing trend to put more intelligence into ‘edge’ devices. UK sales of higher end, analytics-heavy network cameras may be stopped in their tracks if tougher standards are imposed here.
So broadly NW systems is in favour of the new code but we also want to ensure it does not hinder the development and use of new, more effective technologies that further enhance the security we all enjoy. To this end, we would welcome clarification on how exactly the Home Office intends to test the admissibility of some of the more advanced technologies the new commissioner worries about.

Andrew Rennison has since announced that he is unlikely to hold the post of the Surveillance Camera Commissioner beyond February 2014.

For further reading

Go to:
Draft Surveillance Camera Code of Practice: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/surveillance-camera-code-of-practice-consultation

For more detail on the history of the CCTV Code of Conduct: http://www.ico.org.uk/about_us/consultations/~/media/documents/library/Data_Protection/Notices/ic_response_to_home_office_consultation_surveillance_cameras_code_of_practice.ashx

Frank Crouwel profile

Frank Crouwel has held senior posts within the CCTV and IP video industry since 1999. As managing director of CCTV equipment manufacturer Charles Grant Ltd, Frank secured OEM contracts with manufacturers Panasonic, Axis Communications, Vicon Industries and GE Interlogix. He secured a 1,2m euro EU subsidy for the company’s R&D and led the resulting project partnership involving eight high-tech companies from five European countries.

In 2003, Frank joined IP video company Evolve as Business Development Manager to oversee the firm’s expansion UK-wide. Frank then met the two other co-founders of NW Systems and together they formed NW Systems Group (originally called Network Webcams Ltd) in November 2004.

NW Systems Group background

NW Systems Group is an IP Video and security solutions provider. The group has five principal offerings: NW Security is an integrator of video security systems within IT offering expertise in CCTV and IT. Remote Manager is a web-based camera system designed for construction and development projects. It is for monitoring build progress, collection of visual image archives and production of professional time-lapse movies for online project promotion as well as community and stakeholder engagement. SecurityStation is a hosted video offering and Streamdays is a live streaming webcam hosting service for the tourism, leisure and hospitality sectors. Network Webcams is the Group’s supply-only division, offering a range of IP cameras, video management software and accessories.

Related News

Newsletter

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter to stay on top of security news and events.

© 2024 Professional Security Magazine. All rights reserved.

Website by MSEC Marketing