Camera Surveillance in Jersey - Ministerial Response - 18 February 2014

Findings

Comments

1

Surveillance by consent:

Surveillance by consent' is becoming a key element of CCTV practice in the UK and EU, especially in relation to the provision  of  public  space  systems  in town  and  city  centres.  We  have  not encountered any initiatives that seek to understand  the  extent  to  which surveillance  operates  on  a  consensual basis in Jersey. Jersey's Data Protection Code  of  Practice  should  contain  a statement on the need to seek consent from  the  people  surveilled,  including signs for public and private spaces and the need for consultation exercises for public camera installations. The Code should  also  contain  a  requirement  to make the public aware of the purpose(s) of CCTV cameras and the location of cameras  (paragraph 215  and  adviser's report section 2.1).

Most members of the public recognise that Police CCTV cameras are there to prevent and detect crime and ensure public safety. It is recognised there is always  room  for  increased  public consultation and engagement in order to ensure greater transparency.

The  term  surveillance  by  consent' underpins  how  public  space  CCTV systems are being used and developed. It  is,  however,  recognised  that  the phrase  may  cause  confusion  by introducing  a  notion  of  consent beyond  that  exercised  directly  by individuals  themselves  on  their  own behalf. The provision of information is  the  first  step  in  transparency  and accountability.

CCTV Cameras are strategically and overtly placed; they are not hidden but

are  there  for  all  to  see.  Information

Findings

Comments

outlining  the  location  of  the  Town CCTV  system  has  recently  been added to the States of Jersey Police website.

People  in  public  places  should normally  be  made  aware  whenever they are being monitored by cameras and who is undertaking the activity. Signs  indicating  that  cameras  are operating  can  be  displayed  where appropriate. However, coverage of the Town Centre is extensive, which has the potential to result in an excessive amount  of  signage  being  placed around the Town Centre.

The  police  are  supportive  of  any framework  that  helps  in  the  fight against  crime  and  anti-social behaviour, while reassuring the public that cameras in public places are used proportionately and effectively.

2

Proportionality:

As a general principle, public service providers  should  take  an  evidence- based  approach  to  the  deployment  of their  camera  systems.  This  should comprise an unambiguous statement of what  the  surveillance  equipment  is intended  to  achieve,  a  clear  and evidenced identification of the type and prevalence of the issue it is intended to address, identification of non-intrusive alternative strategies, and consideration of whether such less intrusive measures could be deployed for those ends (and only  discounted  if  inadequate).  New efficacy  monitoring  processes  should also  be  drawn  upon  to  make  an objective and informed evidence-based decision  over  whether  surveillance cameras  provide  the  most  effective response  to  the  particular  issue. Experience of practices in the UK and other EU countries could also be drawn on  to  inform  this  process  (see adviser's report,  section 2.3  and recommendation 3).

The aim of the Town Centre camera system  is  to  help  reduce  and  detect crime and reduce the fear of crime. It also  supports  longer-term  crime reduction strategies. This contributes to  providing  a  safe  environment  for those  living,  working  and  visiting St. Helier .

It is important that the use of camera systems  should  not  be  intrusive  and should  remain  proportionate  to  the purpose for the surveillance in the first instance. It is recognised that public confidence and trust may be improved by a clear explanation outlining why monitoring  of  public  space  is considered legitimate and necessary.

The National Decision-Making model is a fundamental element of training and  forms  the  basis  for  the deployment and use of cameras. An assessment  of  lawfulness, proportionality  and  necessity  remain key  to  police  decision-making  and ensuring actions are legitimate. Many of the issues raised are enshrined in Human  Rights  legislation,  by  which all officers and staff are bound.

Findings

Comments

Good practice dictates that any CCTV system  should  be  periodically reviewed  to  ensure  it  remains necessary, proportionate and effective in  meeting  its  stated  purpose.  The system operates fairly within the law and only for the purposes for which it is  intended.  It  is  utilised  with  due regard  to  the  right  of  respect  for privacy of the individual.

3

Public attitudes:

Public  sector  CCTV  is  generally perceived  as  benign,  an  anti-crime measure  which  brings  few disadvantages  of  which  people  are conscious.  CCTV  in  public  spaces  is not  thought  to  intrude  on  personal privacy, a concept associated with the home.  However,  there  is  no  real evidence that the public have a good understanding  of  the  technological capabilities of CCTV systems or how they are used (paragraph 109).

A  process  of  recording  additional information on the use of CCTV will contribute  to  the  dissemination  of clearer  information  on  the  States  of Jersey Police website. This will allow the public to have a more informed perspective.

4

Public engagement:

In order to retain public confidence in the appropriate use of CCTV in public spaces, it is essential that the States of Jersey  Police  and  other  public  sector CCTV operators engage with the public in  an  open  and  transparent  way  to explain the capabilities and limitations of their systems. The States of Jersey Police  currently  provide  minimal information to the public on the Town Centre CCTV system, the location of cameras and its operational procedures. Performance reporting which used to be included  in  States  of  Jersey  Police Annual reports has been discontinued. The introduction of a new Town Centre CCTV system sharpens the focus on the need for the States of Jersey Police to provide the public with a good business case demonstrating value for money for the project (paragraphs 127 and 167).

The  dissemination  of  far  more information  on  camera  systems, locations,  policy  and  procedures, impact  assessments,  performance statistics  and  other  management information,  including  reviews  and audits  undertaken,  will  hopefully generate increased public feedback.

Increased  consultation  and engagement  will  provide  an opportunity to identify any concerns; and  influence  the  balance  between public  protection  and  individual privacy.

Any  extension  of  the  Town  CCTV system  will  involve  wider  public engagement, ensuring that the public's views  about  police  camera  systems are taken into account.

Findings

Comments

5

Evaluating the effectiveness of CCTV:

There is an overwhelming view among operators  that  CCTV  provides  a  vital function in enhancing public safety and reducing crime and disorder in Jersey, but  robust  evidence,  backed  by statistical  data,  for  the  reduction  and prevention  of  crime,  is  hard  to  find. Systems  which  do  not  achieve  their stated purpose should be discontinued; however,  we  have  seen  no  evidence that any such decisions have been taken in  the  public  sector.  The  requirement that  public  sector  CCTV  operators should undertake a minimum standard of  evaluation  on  an  annual  basis  to ensure that their systems are effective and  appropriately  sited  must  be reinforced.  This  evaluation  should  be included in the statutory annual returns to  the  Data  Protection  Commissioner (paragraphs 141 and 208 and adviser's report, section 2.2).

The States of Jersey Police recognise the importance of evidencing that the camera  systems  reflect  an  efficient, effective  and  economic  way  of enhancing  policing  and  ensuring public safety; and that the cameras are sited appropriately. A procedure has been  initiated  to  ensure  the  capture and  wider  dissemination  of  data  to allow the public to assess the value of the system.

6

Governance of camera surveillance:

Since  the  publication  of  the  Data Protection  Commissioner's  Code  of Practice and Guidance on the Use of CCTV  in  2005  there  have  been  a number of important developments in the  UK  in  the  governance  and regulation of CCTV. It is apparent that some aspects of the current Jersey Code of Practice are outdated and should be brought  in  line  with  best  practice elsewhere in the UK and Europe. Our advisers  have  made  a  number  of detailed  suggestions  (paragraph 218 and adviser's report, section 2.11).

A UK Surveillance Camera Code of Conduct came into force in June 2013. A new local code of practice may help reassure  the  public  that  their  civil liberties  are  being  respected  and enable  them  to  challenge  wherever they have concerns.

It is suggested that there are already in place  appropriate  checks  and balances;  however,  any  further promotion  of  good  practice  and approved standards is welcomed.

7

Town Centre CCTV network:

The States of Jersey Police are at an advanced  stage  in  their  project  to replace, upgrade and extend the current Town  Centre  network  of  CCTV cameras.  This  project  should  have involved the preparation of a detailed business case, available to the public, demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of

The  current,  ongoing,  project  is intended  to  replace  and  upgrade cameras which are over 15 years old, are no longer cost-effective or fit for purpose.  Camera  technology  has developed  in  the  years  since  the system  was  installed.  The  current upgrade and replacement is in effect a simple like-for-like swap' to ensure

Findings

Comments

CCTV as a crime prevention measure. The  Police,  however,  have  assumed that  the  benefits  of  CCTV  are  well- known and accepted. The Police must urgently revise their Code of Practice, improve  their  evaluation  mechanisms which  have  been  neglected  in  recent years, and must provide the public with a  clear  statement  about  the  functions and capabilities of their proposed new system  as  well  as  a  privacy  impact assessment  for  any  proposed  new locations  (paragraph 34  and  adviser's report, section 2.5).

the recording of high-quality images.

Work on the like-for-like replacement system  is  already  underway  due  to technical  issues  with  the  existing system.  A  like-for-like  recording solution  has  been  purchased  and installation  is  underway  (completion end of February 2014).

A process of continuous review of the Town  camera  system  helps  in assessing  whether  the  locations  of cameras  remain  appropriate  and justified, and whether there is a case for removal or relocation.

The  use  of  a  privacy  impact assessment  can  help  enhance  public confidence that a system operator has taken  into  account  the  potential  to interfere with privacy.

Following  discussion  with  the Scrutiny Panel, wider data collection on the use of CCTV was initiated in October  2013.  This  will  allow  the publication  of  increased  statistical information on an annual basis.

8

Automatic Number Plate Recognition:

The proposed new fixed ANPR system would  provide  the  States  of  Jersey Police  with  a  capability  to  monitor virtually all traffic movements in and out of St. Helier . The system is capable of being linked to an extensive database holding  significant  information  on Islanders. This development potentially represents a major enhancement of the surveillance powers of the Police over citizens  in  Jersey.  It  is  essential  for purposes  of  transparency,  particularly for  new  CCTV  systems  being introduced,  including  the  States  of Jersey  Police  ANPR  system,  that  the principles  of  data  connectivity  are established in the Data Protection Code of Practice and Guidance on the Use of CCTV.  The  Jersey  Data  Protection Code of Practice and Guidance on the Use  of  CCTV  should  include  a requirement  to  specify  where  the

Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR), like most police information systems, does involve an element of data-matching.  By  way  of  example, when conducting a vehicle registration check  (number  plate),  the  details  of the registered keeper are drawn from a database administered by Driver and Vehicle  Standards.  Driving  Licence applications  are  administered  by  the respective  Parish  Authority.  In  the absence  of  such  data-matching,  it would  be  difficult  for  the  Police  to quickly  establish  who  owned  a vehicle, or whether any offences were being committed. There are currently in place clear guidelines, policy and procedure relating to the use of Police data  to  ensure  compliance  with  the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005.

The States of Jersey Police purchased an ANPR system in March 2006 and it  was  fitted  to  an  unmarked  traffic vehicle.  In  January  2009,  a  further

Findings

Comments

matching of personal data takes place, with whom and for what purposes. This is  a  requirement  of  European  Data Protection  law.  In  this  respect,  data should  only  be  matched  with  named databases (i.e. ANPR images with the official vehicle licensing database) and not  be  matched  with  other  unnamed databases.  There  needs  to  be  a mechanism  to  regulate  this (paragraphs 51–53).

vehicle was fitted out with the same system. Both these vehicles have since been decommissioned, and in 2012 a Volkswagen  Transporter  van  was fitted with one of the original systems. This vehicle is operated by the 24hr uniform shift. This equipment remains available for operational use. In effect, SoJP have been utilising ANPR since 2006 and continue to have it available. It is not at present being utilised for operational reasons.

In  order  to  reduce  the  impact  on resources  and  increase  capability, consideration is currently being given to the use of static ANPR similar to one operated at St. Helier Harbour in conjunction  with  the  Customs  and Immigration  Service.  This  may involve the siting of ANPR cameras at key  locations  covering  the  arterial routes into/out of St. Helier . A static ANPR camera system is one that is located in a fixed position.

National  guidelines  outline  that  an assessment  should  be  conducted taking  account  of  the  following factors –

• National security and counter- terrorism

• Serious, organised and major crime

• Local crime

• Community confidence and reassurance, and crime prevention and reduction.

In  summary,  when  used  in  an appropriate  and  effective  manner, ANPR has proved to be a useful tool in  the  detection  of  many  offences. States of Jersey Police are currently considering  the  implementation  of ANPR covering access routes around St. Helier . Whilst funding is available, a full business case has not as yet been produced.  In  assessing  whether  new static  ANPR  cameras  are  to  be deployed, a process of further review and wider consultation is required.

Findings

Comments

9

Body-Worn Video Cameras:

The States of Jersey Police are trialling 6 body-worn  video  (BWV)  cameras. These  cameras  can  protect  both suspects  and  Police  Officers,  as  they are  designed  to  provide  an  impartial, accurate record of incidents attended by Officers.  Experience  elsewhere  shows that the introduction of these cameras has  led  to  a  sharp  fall  in  allegations against  Officers.  There  is  a  robust policy in place to ensure the integrity of video  evidence.  A  publicly  available code of practice should be developed by the Police (paragraphs 66–67).

The States of Jersey Police are in the process of considering a business case for the continued use of Body-Worn Video.

There are strong arguments to support the fact that the investment in Body- Worn  Video  has  improved  Officer safety, improved evidential gathering capability  and  quality.  It  has  also enhanced Officer confidence and has the potential to deliver actual savings in  terms  of  providing  best  evidence and reducing not guilty and reserved pleas  and  reducing  malicious complaints.

Details of the States of Jersey Police Body-Worn  Video  Policy  will  be available  on  the  States  of  Jersey Police website.

10

Data-matching:

Data-matching  is  a  process  that  is relatively  hidden'  from  public  view. Whilst we do not want to obstruct the appropriate proportionate use of data- matching, it is important that the public are made aware of such processes, that they  are  captured  by  existing governance  arrangements,  and  that safeguards  are  established  to  ensure unnecessary  data-matching  does  not take  place.  We  recommend  that  any camera system that incorporates data- matching as part of its purpose clearly specifies this in the system's Code of Practice  and  on  appropriate  signage. This  should  also  be  specified  in  the Data Protection Commissioner's CCTV Register  of  surveillance  cameras  and systems (adviser's report, section 2.10 and recommendation 10).

It is contended that there are already appropriate safeguards in place in the form of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law and Human Rights legislation. A Code  of  Practice  may  assist  in ensuring  due  consideration  to  these obligations and contribute to decisions relating  to  legitimacy  and proportionality.

11

Creating a Register of CCTV cameras:

A  register  or  census  of  cameras  and their  purposes  is  currently  absent. Creating a register could make it easier to ensure compliance to regulations and codes of practice and place Jersey at the forefront of European best practice in

CCTV  footage  has  become  an important investigative tool for Police. It is regularly used to investigate and solve  crimes  and  has  proven  to  be very  useful  in  court  when  used  as evidence. Establishing an accurate and comprehensive  register  that  outlines the location of CCTV systems would

Findings

Comments

this area. It would also enhance public awareness  and  confidence  and  enable political oversight. This register could be achieved through a short extension to  the  Data  Controllers'  statutory annual  submission  to  the  Data Protection  Commissioner.  This  could be comprised of a supplementary sheet, preferably one sheet of paper, capturing additional  information,  such  as:  the number of cameras in a system, their location,  the  existence  of  a  code  of practice,  primary  and  secondary purposes, links to other databases and perhaps some aspects of their technical capability  (the  latter  to  differentiate between  different  types  of  CCTV) (paragraph 80  and  adviser's  report, section 2.7).

assist in identifying potential sources of  evidence.  It  would  also  assist  in ensuring the public is better informed about camera systems.

12

CCTV in Schools and Colleges:

The primary purpose of CCTV systems in schools and colleges in Jersey is for the security of the premises and to deter intruders  or  petty  vandalism  out  of school hours, although not all schools have  identified  a  need  to  install cameras. CCTV cameras are not used for  the  purposes  of  monitoring  pupil behaviour or quality of teaching. One school, however, does use CCTV in a much  more  extensive  way,  and  has found CCTV to be an effective means of  safeguarding  pupils  when  they  are unsupervised.  In  this  school,  cameras have been installed in all classrooms. This  development  has  been  made  in accordance with Data Protection advice and has not given rise to any objections from  parents,  students  or  staff (paragraph 87).

It  appears  that  there  is  a  general consensus that society is content for young  people  to  be  monitored  by cameras  to  ensure  safety.  It  is, therefore,  possible  that  such consensus  extends  more  widely  and includes camera monitoring in public areas such as St. Helier .

13

Advanced digital capabilities:

Modern  digital  systems,  such  as  the system to be installed in the St. Helier Town  Centre,  will  offer  the  potential for  advanced Video  Content  Analysis features, such as facial recognition, in the  future.  They  will  certainly  make their  introduction  easy:  the  proposed new  system  could  be  seen  as  a

The effectiveness of a camera system is  dependent  upon  its  capability  to capture,  process,  analyse  and  store images of a quality which is suitable for its intended purpose. Whilst keen to  ensure  the  provision  of  better quality images for use by the Police and  in  the  criminal  justice  system, there is currently no intention at this

Findings

Comments

stepping-stone  for  more  sophisticated mass  surveillance.  Such  advances should be treated with caution. Privacy impact  assessments  and  public consultation must take place before any such capabilities are introduced by the public sector (paragraph 100).

stage  to  incorporate  any  additional functions  (such  as  facial recognition or movement sensors).

14

Privacy concerns:

In  general,  the  presence  of  CCTV cameras in public spaces is not seen as an  intrusion  into  privacy.  However, new  technologies  have  increased  the scope  and  processing  capabilities  of camera  surveillance,  and  are  often assembled in a piecemeal way without citizens  being  aware  of  their implications.  Too  much  surveillance can fundamentally alter the relationship between  the  individual  and  the  State (paragraph 116).

It is only proper that those who may be  most  affected  by  the  siting  of Police  cameras  should  have  the opportunity  to  raise  any  concerns. This forms part of the accountability that  underpins  the  concept  of surveillance  by  consent.  Guidelines are clear that cameras will not be used to look into private property. Officers and  staff  must  demonstrate  suitable knowledge of pertinent legislation and

understanding of Force policy relating to CCTV.

All  recording  in  the  Force  Control Room  is  carried  out  in  a  regulated area. Routine access is restricted. Any access by other persons will be with the  permission  of  the  control  room supervisor.  To  access  the  camera system, officers and staff are required to  log  into  the  system  using  an individual log-on code. This ensures appropriate checks and balances and an auditable process.

15

Codes of Practice:

Every CCTV operator should have their own publicly available code of practice compliant  with  the  Data Commissioner's  Code  of  Practice setting out the purpose of the system, their data management procedures and security  policies  and  their  training processes  for  CCTV  operators.  This code of practice should be reviewed on a regular basis to ensure that the CCTV system is operating effectively against stated purposes. There is inconsistency across States departments in relation to compliance with the requirement for all CCTV operators to have their own code of practice – some refer simply to the Data Protection Code of Practice and

The  States  of  Jersey  Police  are reviewing their policy and procedure. Once  finalised,  the  policy  will  be disseminated  and  published  on  the States of Jersey Police website.

Findings

Comments

Guidance in the Use of CCTV as their model, whereas it should be standard practice  for  all  public  sector  CCTV operators  to  have  a  specific  code  of practice for their operation setting out their  purpose,  data  management procedures  and  security  policies,  and information to the public on how they can contact the organisation in case of queries about their operation of CCTV (paragraphs 178 and 184 and adviser's report, section 2.11).

16

States of Jersey Police Force Policy:

Training related to data processing and privacy  principles  is  an  essential element in the training programme for States  of  Jersey  Police  Force  CCTV operators. However, the current Police Code of Practice falls short of what is seen elsewhere in the UK and Europe. The  Police  have  acknowledged  the requirement to update their policies and procedures, and have assured the Panel that the documents would be reviewed as  part  of  their  project  to  renew  and extend the current Town Centre system. Appropriate governance arrangements, an updated Code of Practice, and the introduction of auditable process, must all be introduced as a matter of urgency to ensure the delivery of a service in the public  interest,  and  to  ensure compliance  with  UK  and  European standards and norms in the provision of CCTV. This is a necessary pre-requisite of  the  upgrade  to  the  current  Town Centre system (paragraph 193).

The States of Jersey Police conducts specific  training  (Human  Rights Legislation,  Data  Protection  (Jersey) Law  2005,  and  National  Decision- Making Model), all of which reinforce the importance of the right to privacy, processing  data  fairly  and  lawfully, and  ensuring  that  police  action remains  justifiable,  necessary  and proportionate.  All  operators  to  be trained in their responsibilities so they are aware of the user's security and disclosure  policies  and  the  rights  of individuals.

All CCTV data is stored securely with access limited to authorised personnel only.  The  Force  complies  with guidance  and  adheres  to  best practice' outlined  in  the  Association of  Chief  Police  Officers'  procedure and best practice.

17

Retention periods:

Personal  data  captured  by  CCTV  is stored  for  varying  lengths  of  time across  different  organisations  using CCTV in Jersey. In almost all cases, the length of time exceeds that governing data retention in the UK and elsewhere in  Europe.  Given  the  significantly lower levels of crime and disorder in Jersey,  it  is  hard  to  justify  why  the Police and other operators require much longer  periods  of  data  retention

Images and information obtained from a surveillance camera system should not be kept for longer than necessary to  fulfil the  purpose for which they were obtained in the first place. The retention period will vary due to the purpose for the system, and how long images and other information need to be retained so as to serve its intended purpose. It is not, therefore, possible to be prescriptive about maximum or minimum periods. On occasions, there

Findings

Comments

(sometimes triple) than, say, London's Metropolitan Police, (paragraph 201).

may be the need to retain images for a longer  period;  for  example,  when investigating  a  crime,  to  allow  the opportunity to view the images as part of an active investigation.

18

Domestic CCTV issues:

The Data Protection Office receives a significant number of enquiries relating to  the  potential  invasion  of  privacy from CCTV security cameras installed in  neighbouring  properties  with  a potential  overlooking  into  properties. Disputes over CCTV may be part of a broader  conflict  between  neighbours. Serious cases of misuse of CCTV may constitute  harassment,  and  could  be dealt  with  by  the  Police.  This  is  a complex problem to solve, not covered currently  by  data  protection  or  other legislation. One partial solution would be  the  introduction  of  planning applications  for  installing  visually prominent cameras with a potential for overlooking.  This  would  allow neighbours the opportunity to challenge the location of cameras (paragraph 235 and adviser's report, section 2.8).

We also believe that it would be helpful to  neighbours  if  all  domestic  CCTV operators were obliged to register their systems  with  Data  Protection.  We acknowledge  that  this  obligation  is currently extra-statutory, but we request the  Data  Protection  Commissioner  to consider and explain the implications of this suggestion (paragraph 237).

In  addition,  the  Data  Protection Commissioner  should  prepare  a comprehensive guidance note for those wanting  to  install  a  CCTV  system  at home for security purposes or to tackle anti-social behaviour (paragraph 239).

Whilst there is no specific legislation regulating  domestic  CCTV  use,  the Police will assess any complaints to assess  what,  if  any,  offences  are revealed.  The  absence  of  legislation can on occasions prove problematic.

19

Rights of access to CCTV footage:

Individuals whose images are recorded have a right to view those images and to  be  provided  with  a  copy  of  the images.  Operators'  codes  of  practice should  detail  how  members  of  the

There  are  procedures  in  place  to respond to such requests. Individuals can  make  a  subject  access'  request under Article 7 of the Data Protection (Jersey)  Law  2005.  Data  includes images.  Guidance  on  how  to  make

Findings

Comments

public  make  access  requests.  In practice,  such  requests  by  individuals are not common and this right is not widely  known.  Individuals  face obstacles,  as  it  may  be  necessary  to block out images of third parties and they may be required to provide heavy justification  for  their  request (paragraph 246).

such  a  request  is  available  to  the public on the States of Jersey Police website.

20

CCTV in the workplace:

There are legitimate uses of CCTV in the  workplace:  for  example,  in monitoring till transactions in bars and supermarkets, or movements of stock in warehouses.  We  have  received  no evidence that CCTV is used in office environments in Jersey to monitor staff performance.  Where  employers  make staff aware of the purposes and scope of  this  surveillance  and  make  clear policies available on procedures for the security,  processing  and  retention  of images,  employees  generally  find  no reason for concern about the overt use of  CCTV.  However,  employees  find that continuous monitoring, where this occurs,  is  overbearing.  Complaints occur when employers use CCTV for monitoring purposes outside their stated policies  and  procedures (paragraph 258).

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

1

Recommendation:

Before any extension to the current Town  centre  CCTV  system  the States of Jersey Police must:

• provide the public with a clear statement about the functions, capabilities  and  purpose  of their new CCTV system;
• re-evaluate the justification for each of their current sites; and
• publish  a  privacy  impact assessment  statement  for  any proposed  new  locations (paragraph 35).

HA

Prior  to  the implementation  of  any new  cameras,  the  Force will  continue  to  review proportionality  and effectiveness.  This includes an assessment on whether  the  location  of cameras  remains  justified in  meeting  the  stated purpose and whether there is  a  case  for  removal  or relocation.

A  privacy  impact assessment  would undoubtedly  assist  in assessing  and  identifying any privacy concerns.

2

Recommendation:

A commitment should be made by the Minister for Home Affairs and the States of Jersey Police that no development  of  CCTV  which includes advanced Video Content Analysis  features,  such  as  facial recognition, should proceed in the future  without  instigating  an informed  public  debate  and seeking  approval  by  the  States (paragraph 101).

HA

Relying  on  analytics  to automatically  monitor cameras  and  identify events  of  interest  is  in many  cases  much  more effective than reliance on a human operator. However, functions  such  as  line- crossing detection, motion detection, crowd or people detection,  automatic  track or  zoom  and  facial recognition  are  not currently  being considered.  Any  move towards  incorporating such  technology  with  the Town  CCTV  system should  rightly  be  subject to public consultation.

The new recording system is  not  capable  of  this without upgrade cost (and this has not been requested or budgeted for).

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

3

Recommendation:

The States of Jersey Police should follow  the  example  of  local authorities in the UK and provide extensive  information  on  their website  on  the  Town  Centre CCTV  system,  including  a  map indicating the location of cameras (paragraph 128).

HA

Information  is  on  the States  of  Jersey  Police website.

The process of review and dissemination  of additional  information continues. There is now a States  of  Jersey  Police web-page  dedicated  to providing  information  on the  Town  CCTV  system, policy and procedures. It is intended  that  the  process of  adding  and  updating information continues.

4

Recommendation:

Appropriate  signage  should  be erected  in  the  town  centre indicating that CCTV surveillance is  taking  place,  with  a  contact point  for  members  of  the  public with queries (paragraph 129).

HA

Signage  may  be  effective in  regulating  the  use  of CCTV  and  ensuring  the privacy  of  the  citizen. However,  signage  may increase  anxiety  about crime  and  disorder,  or suggest  a  culture  of criminality  exists  within St. Helier .  It  is  suggested that rather than raising the profile  of  CCTV,  signs would  simply  become absorbed  into  the environment of the Town to the extent that they go unnoticed.

It  is  proposed  that  wider consultation  and engagement  with  key stakeholders  (residents, businesses and the Parish) take  place  before  any decision  is  made. Planning  permission  and consent of building owners would  be  required  to  do this for Town Centre.

5

Recommendation:

Appropriate  governance arrangements, an updated Code of Practice,  and  the  introduction  of auditable  process  should  be

HA

Code  of  Practice  to  be updated  to  ensure compliance  with  UK  and European  standards  and disseminated.

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

introduced as a matter of urgency to ensure the delivery of a service in the public interest and to ensure compliance with UK and European standards  and  norms  in  the provision  of  CCTV (paragraph 194).

CCTV Live view, Camera control and Playback fully audited  in  new  recording system, due to be installed by end of February.

Access/egress to/from  the Force Control Room is by swipe card (audited).

6

Recommendation:

As part of updating their code of practice and procedures on CCTV, the States of Jersey Police should review  their  policy  on  retention periods to ensure that they are in line  with  current  best  practice (paragraph 203).

HA

The  Data  Protection  Law does  not  prescribe  any specific  minimum  or maximum  retention periods which apply to all systems  or  footage. Rather,  retention  should reflect  the  organisation's own  purposes  for recording images.

Guidance  dictates  that images should be kept for as  long  as  necessary  to meet  the  purpose  of recording  them.  On occasion,  there  may  be  a need to retain images for a longer  period.  Current retention  times  are  set  at 90 days  for  the  Town CCTV system.

System  incapable  of extending beyond 90 days without  additional expenditure.

7

Recommendation:

The States of Jersey Police should issue  regular  notification  to  any property-owners  where  Town Centre CCTV cameras are capable of  looking  through  windows, reminding  them  of  procedures  to preserve privacy (paragraph 21).

HA

Consideration  will  be given  to  how  best  to ensure  property-holders are aware of the extent of CCTV  coverage  around the Town area.

8

Recommendation:

Before  implementing  their proposal for a fixed ANPR system around   St. Helier ,  the  States  of Jersey  Police  must  consult  the public  and  publish  a  privacy

HA

ANPR  cameras  can  only be deployed in the pursuit of a legitimate aim', such as  assisting  in  the detection and deterrence of criminal  activity.  The

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

impact statement (paragraph 54)

process  of  reviewing  and justifying  ANPR  will include  consultation  with stakeholders  and  an assessment of the impact.

The  ANPR  system  is regularly  updated  with registration  details  of vehicles  driven  by individuals  the  police  are seeking,  and  then signalling an alert if one of these vehicles is captured by a camera.

9

Recommendation:

The  Data  Protection  Code  of Practice and Guidance on the Use of  CCTV  should  include  a requirement to specify  where  the matching  of  personal  data  takes place,  with  whom  and  for  what purposes (paragraph 55).

CM

N/A

10

Recommendation:

In  accordance  with  the  above recommendation,  the  States  of Jersey Police should state clearly what databases their ANPR system will  access  and  their  purpose. Connections to any new databases should  not  be  made  without providing  clear  justification  and seeking  approval  from  the  Data Protection Commissioner (paragraph 56).

HA

ANPR  is  compliant  with the provisions of the Data Protection  (Jersey)  Law 2005.  There  is  a reasonable case to say that the  use  of  a  registered keeper  database  will enhance  the  ability  to reduce  offending  and improve  safety  on  the roads.

11

Recommendation:

The States of Jersey Police should provide a publically available code of practice on the purpose and use of body-worn video-cameras, including how personal data is processed (paragraph 68) .

HA

Current  Force  policy  on the  use  of  Body-Worn Video will be published on the States of Jersey Police website once its continued use  has  been  ratified  by the Chief Officer and the Minister.

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

12

Recommendation:

The  statutory  annual  submission by  Data  Controllers  to  the  Data Protection  Office  should  be supplemented  by  additional information  (as  specified  in  the report).  This  should  be  collated into  a  CCTV  register'  which should  be  publically  available (paragraph 81).

CM

N/A

13

Recommendation:

An annual review of the number and  types  of  CCTV  should  be presented to the Minister for Home Affairs  by  the  Data  Protection Commissioner  (based  on  the CCTV register). This would allow some  political  debate  and oversight (paragraph 82).

HA CM

Information  to  be presented  to  the  Minister for  Home  Affairs  and included  in  States  of Jersey  Police  Annual Report.

14

Recommendation:  A  review  and updating  of  the  current  Data Protection  Code  of  Practice  and Guidance on the use of CCTV to take  account  of  best  practice elsewhere in the UK and beyond. Improvements we would point to include:

• A requirement for operators to include signage,
• To  integrate  the  principle  of surveillance by consent',
• A requirement for operators to engage  in  public  awareness activities,
• A requirement for operators to periodically  evaluate  the performance of systems,
• A requirement for operators to establish  a  log  or  register  of access to CCTV control-rooms and footage,
• A requirement for operators to establish training in relation to appropriate levels of individual surveillance and live targeting,
• A requirement for operators to make  the  public  aware  of surveillance  systems  which

CM

N/A

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

incorporate  data  matching processes,

• To  establish  a  register  of cameras and systems,
• To  provide  more  detailed guidance  on  the  use  of surveillance  cameras  in domestic  residential  settings, and
• To incorporate a definition of public  space  (paragraph 218 and  adviser's  report, section 2.11).

15

Recommendation:

The  Data  Protection  Code  of Practice and Guidance on the Use of  CCTV  should  specify standardised  retention  periods based on the operational purposes of  the  CCTV  systems (paragraph 202).

CM

N/A

16

Recommendation:

The  Data  Protection  Code  of Practice and Guidance on the use of CCTV should incorporate a legal requirement  to  comply  with  the principles  of  surveillance  by consent,  including  a  requirement for  signage,  consultation  and public  awareness  mechanisms (paragraph 216).

CM

N/A

17

Recommendation:

The Code of Practice should also contain  a  requirement  for  all CCTV  operators  to  make  the public  aware  of  the  location  of cameras, the  purpose  of  systems, and  any  data  matching  that  may take place (paragraph 217).

HA CM P&E

States  of  Jersey  Police website updated to reflect this. The States of Jersey Police  welcome  the implementation  of  the draft  code  as  a  single source  of  advice  and guidance  on  the  use  of camera  systems  in  public places.

18

Recommendation:

Safeguards should be introduced to ensure  only  appropriate  and necessary  data  matching  takes place.  Any  camera  system  that incorporates data matching as part of its purpose clearly specify this

HA CM

Information  collected  for one  area  of  policing purpose may have value to another.   Therefore,  all police  information  should be  treated  as  a  corporate resource.   The  use  of

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

in the system's  Code  of Practice and  on  appropriate  signage.  This should  also  be  specified  in  the Data  Protection  Commissioner's CCTV  Register  of  surveillance cameras  and  systems  (adviser's report,  section 2.10  and recommendation 10).

ANPR  is  compliant  with the provisions of the Data Protection  (Jersey)  Law 2005.

19

Recommendation:

All  States  departments  operating public'  CCTV  systems  should undertake an annual review/audit, which  sets  out  the  scope  of  the system, its stated purpose(s) and a range  of  performance  indicators which can be utilised to judge the effectiveness  of  the  system (paragraph 168).

HA CM

A  regular  review  of  the proportionality  and effectiveness  of  camera systems  should  assess whether  the  location  of cameras  remains  justified in  meeting  the  stated purpose and whether there is  a  case  for  removal  or relocation.

The States of Jersey Police are currently working with the  Ports  Authority  to share  cameras  where possible (and hence reduce number).

20

Recommendation:

We  also  recommend  including some  comparison  of  the  crime rates in areas observed by CCTV against those without coverage in order  to  assist  understandings  of crime displacement and to provide and evidence base to inform future camera deployment decisions. This process  should  be  followed  by  a review  of  the  appropriateness  of existing  camera  positioning (paragraph 169).

HA

A review of by the College of  Policing  suggests CCTV  is  designed  to change  the  environment within which crime occurs and makes for a small, but statistically  significant, reduction in crime.

Whilst  the  importance  of collecting  data  is recognised,  the  process suggested would impose a disproportionate administrative burden. The Town cameras are located to monitor areas that either see  the  highest  rate  of footfall,  are  busiest  in terms  of  the  night-time economy. or are identified as potential hotspots' for crime  or  anti-social behaviour.  If  any  of  the Town  cameras  were  not

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

considered  useful  or effective  in  supporting policing  or  safeguarding the  public they  would  be removed or relocated.

21

Recommendation:

All  States  departments  using CCTV  should  have  their  own dedicated  and  publicly  available code  of  practice setting  out their purpose,  data  management procedures,  security  policies  and training  procedures,  as  well  as information to the public on how they  can  contact the  organisation in  case  of  queries  about  their operation  of  CCTV (paragraph 185).

CM

N/A

22

Recommendation:

All public sector CCTV operators should be required to have a log of who  has  had  training  and  when. This  training  should  include knowledge  and  skills  associated with  the  processing  of  personal data,  the  requirement  to  collect performance-related  information and  the  actual  process  of undertaking surveillance. Training should  explicitly  cover  ethical obligations,  regulatory responsibilities, privacy, issues of data  handling  and  protection, responsible subject monitoring and access  requests.  Training requirements should be set out in individual  Code  of  Practice  and should  be  reported  on  in  annual system reviews (paragraph 185 and adviser's report 2.13).

HA CM

The  public  expect  CCTV to  be  used  responsibly with proper safeguards in place.  All  officers  and staff  within  the  States  of Jersey Police are trained.

Effective policing depends on  efficient  information management.  All  officers and staff within the States of  Jersey  Police  are  well trained in the principles of data  management, highlighting  individual human  rights  and compliance  with  the  law. There  are  clear  policies and  procedures  in  place that  regulate  how information  is  gathered, managed, used and how it is  shared.  There  is  a process  of  additional training for Force Control Room  Officers,  CCTV operators  and  those  who manage them.

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

23

Recommendation:

The requirement that public sector CCTV operators should undertake a minimum standard of evaluation on an annual basis to ensure that their  systems  are  effective  and appropriately  sited  should  be reinforced. This evaluation should be included in annual returns to the Data  Protection  Commissioner (paragraph 209).

HA

In  the  development  or review of camera systems, proportionate  consultation and  engagement  with  the public and partners will be an  important  part  of assessing whether there is a  legitimate  aim  and  a pressing  need,  and whether  the  system  itself is  a  proportionate response.

Review last undertaken in 2011/2012.

In line with a commitment towards  greater transparency,  there  is  a process  of  releasing increased information. It is intended  to  include  this information  in  future annual reports.

24

Recommendation:

To  meet  appropriate  security standards, a log of access to each control  room  should  be established.  This  log  should include details such as the name of the visitor, time of visit, purpose and name an employee responsible for  escorting  the  visitor.  Visitors should  be  required  to  present  a recognised  form  of  identification before  being  granted  access  to  a surveillance  camera  operations centre  (Adviser's  report, section 2.4).

HA

Already in place:

• Swipe card for staff
• Visitors  signed  in  at enquiry desk.

25

Recommendation:

All  requests  to  view  footage  are recorded  in  a  log,  not  just  those incidences where footage is legally obtained  for  investigations.  This log  should  apply  to  anyone  not working, at that time, in the CCTV control  room.  The  log  should include details of the name of the person requesting footage, reason, time of request, and name of the

HA

There is policy in place to control  how  images  and information are stored and who has access to them.

• Authority  to  view process in place
• New  recording platform fully audited
• Viewing of any CCTV linked to case file also

logged.

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

person  granting  the  request (Adviser's report, section 2.4).

26

Recommendation:

We  recommend  that  image retention periods are limited to a maximum  31 days  across  public surveillance  camera  operations. This is common practice elsewhere in  the  UK  and  the  EU.  This maximum  data  retention  period should  be  specified  in  the  Data protection Commissioner's CCTV Code of Practice (adviser's report).