Part of the success of a biometrical system depends on the willingness of the society to accept
it. Domestically, and in other democratic nations where civil liberties are part of the legislative equation,
a majority must be available to respond favorably to the technology. Already, people see the benefits of
biometrics when applied in criminal justice; DNA evidence has been used to exonerate and convict
people with stunning accuracy. We can see policymaking that addresses privacy and technology, which
either has bearing on its application or was developed in tandem to address the technology specifically.
These include the Privacy Act of 1974, the E-Government Act of 2002, and the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA). The applications of these privacy acts include protecting information that includes medical
records, digital records, and photographs. The Department of Homeland Security in particular has made
it a part of their operating framework to evaluate new legislation, to make sure new technologies do not
erode privacy, and to report to Congress (Kroph, 2010).
People can be made to understand that biometrics can have a benefit for surveillance of the
innocent. For example, monitoring in the workplace can deter theft and heighten the safety of a parking
lot at night. Other applications that benefit the society include preventing terrorism, speeding up the
check-in process, and protecting personal information (National Research Council of the National
Academies, 2010).
Evidence-based practice shows that other free nations’ populations are agreeable to this type of
technology. For example, in the UK, the government passed the Identity Cards Act of 2006, which
outlined plans to create a biometric-based ID card. This was complemented by the National Identity
Register, which stores all public and private sector personal identities (Rygiel, 2010). Japan uses
biometrics to monitor entry and exit, Israel is passing legislation on a national biometric databases, and
Pakistan is developing national ID cards. The U.S. has developed US-VISIT, which through Congress
developed a series of statutes that mandates an entry-exit system based on biometrics (Kroph, 2010).
The card is used to travel as well as gain access to government services. In 2003, the UN’s ICAO
developed a blueprint for updating international travelers’ passports with biometric information as well
as other Machine Readable Travel Documents, or MRTDs. The favored tools will be facial, iris, and
fingerprint biometrics (Rygiel, 2010).
Ethical considerations, which were discussed at the Third International Conference on Ethics and
Policy of Biometrics and International Data Sharing in Hong Kong, need to be part of this global dialogue
when developing policy, since it is obviously going to be implemented with the tacit agreement of the
populations. These include legal compliance, particularly in nations that have human rights issues, and
also a consideration of privacy, which the UN Convention has determined is a fundamental human right
(Kroph, 2010). There are also inherent risks in creating a global biometrics database, including identity
theft.
it. Domestically, and in other democratic nations where civil liberties are part of the legislative equation,
a majority must be available to respond favorably to the technology. Already, people see the benefits of
biometrics when applied in criminal justice; DNA evidence has been used to exonerate and convict
people with stunning accuracy. We can see policymaking that addresses privacy and technology, which
either has bearing on its application or was developed in tandem to address the technology specifically.
These include the Privacy Act of 1974, the E-Government Act of 2002, and the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA). The applications of these privacy acts include protecting information that includes medical
records, digital records, and photographs. The Department of Homeland Security in particular has made
it a part of their operating framework to evaluate new legislation, to make sure new technologies do not
erode privacy, and to report to Congress (Kroph, 2010).
People can be made to understand that biometrics can have a benefit for surveillance of the
innocent. For example, monitoring in the workplace can deter theft and heighten the safety of a parking
lot at night. Other applications that benefit the society include preventing terrorism, speeding up the
check-in process, and protecting personal information (National Research Council of the National
Academies, 2010).
Evidence-based practice shows that other free nations’ populations are agreeable to this type of
technology. For example, in the UK, the government passed the Identity Cards Act of 2006, which
outlined plans to create a biometric-based ID card. This was complemented by the National Identity
Register, which stores all public and private sector personal identities (Rygiel, 2010). Japan uses
biometrics to monitor entry and exit, Israel is passing legislation on a national biometric databases, and
Pakistan is developing national ID cards. The U.S. has developed US-VISIT, which through Congress
developed a series of statutes that mandates an entry-exit system based on biometrics (Kroph, 2010).
The card is used to travel as well as gain access to government services. In 2003, the UN’s ICAO
developed a blueprint for updating international travelers’ passports with biometric information as well
as other Machine Readable Travel Documents, or MRTDs. The favored tools will be facial, iris, and
fingerprint biometrics (Rygiel, 2010).
Ethical considerations, which were discussed at the Third International Conference on Ethics and
Policy of Biometrics and International Data Sharing in Hong Kong, need to be part of this global dialogue
when developing policy, since it is obviously going to be implemented with the tacit agreement of the
populations. These include legal compliance, particularly in nations that have human rights issues, and
also a consideration of privacy, which the UN Convention has determined is a fundamental human right
(Kroph, 2010). There are also inherent risks in creating a global biometrics database, including identity
theft.
