UK police forces must do more to prevent the wrongful arrests of people subjected to retrospective facial recognition (RFR) searches, according to a Criminal Justice Inspectorate that holds deep concerns about the way in which the technology is used. According to a report from His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS), there is a large gap in understanding among police forces and the National Crime Agency about how RFR should be used in responsible policing. The inspectorate blamed "fragmented and underdeveloped" frameworks for governance and legislation. It pointed to a lack of bespoke legislation to provide a uniform approach to police facial recognition use – and said existing laws have not kept pace with the technology. HMICFRS also said the rules governing each force’s use of RFR are mismatched, and called for a statutory code to be included in the forthcoming Police Reform Bill to set nationwide standards. Illustrating the breadth of misunderstanding across forces, the report noted that despite the message being routinely communicated by National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) reps, individual investigators "often" thought RFR results constituted evidence rather than intelligence. In many cases, they are unaware that RFR results require further enquiries before enforcement action can be taken. "We found that some investigators didn’t always carry out enough corroborative enquiries before acting on potential matches," the report stated. "In a small number of cases, officers relied too heavily on RFR results, which led to inappropriate investigative action. "Although some forces had strengthened their processes after such incidents, practice remained inconsistent." Later in the report, the inspectorate described the findings as "deeply concerning." Some of the excuses police staff offered included acute demands on response teams leading to reduced opportunities to carry out further enquiries before acting on RFR matches. In one force, managers were known to encourage officers to "progress investigations quickly" after getting a match on the RFR system. However, the inspectorate clarified that just because an arrest is made, it does not necessarily mean it is wrongful, as investigators may need to rule out subjects from their inquiries. The onus for taking action should also be placed on the police forces themselves, given that some lack formal procedures regarding how RFR enquiries should be carried out, the report noted. The best forces had centralized facial recognition teams, which generally provided better governance and consistent processes. Officials fear long-term misuse of RFR, and other forms of facial recognition, will erode public trust in the technology, which it insists remains generally high…