During my recent visit to test the Ministry of Justice’s latest technology, I revisited my role as a faux offender within the community. Unlike my previous experience with an alcohol tag, this time, I engaged in experimenting with a new surveillance system.
The initiative involves released convicts and individuals serving non-custodial sentences completing behavioral questionnaires on their phones. Following this, they must submit a brief video for identity verification via artificial intelligence scrutiny.
Prisons Minister James Timpson emphasized the objective of integrating the “state in their pocket via a phone” to ensure offenders recognize ongoing accountability even outside detention.
As an advocate for leveraging technology to tackle the persistent issue of prison overcrowding, Minister Timpson’s latest approach piqued my interest during my trial last week.
Upon setting up my account at the Ministry of Justice and resuming normal activities at my parliamentary office, I received an unexpected check-in notification on my work phone. The prompt from GOV.UK signaled the commencement of the survey, prompting me to provide personal details and respond to inquiries regarding my well-being and requirements for assistance.
During the survey, I candidly disclosed challenges with mental health, financial constraints, and excessive alcohol consumption. Such responses, if mirrored by actual offenders, could trigger alerts for their probation officers to offer necessary support.
After answering the questionnaire, a quick video verification of my identity was mandated. Testing the system with various individuals, including Lord Timpson and colleagues, confirmed the tool’s accuracy in distinguishing identities.
Part of an £8 million initiative to bolster criminal monitoring, this new tool signifies a progression towards a concept of “prison beyond prison” within the community. The pilot program, active in four Probation areas across England, supplements existing offender conditions like GPS tracking, appointments, and curfews.
Minister Timpson underscored the need for enhanced supervision to ensure the efficacy of community-based penalties. He hinted at potential expansions, such as integrating reminder devices for rehab appointments or geolocation services for tracking.
Although the technology exhibited efficiency and user-friendliness during my trial, its long-term impact remains uncertain. Offenders could manipulate survey responses, given the three-day response window, allowing for changing circumstances or emotions. Lord Timpson clarified that virtual check-ins are not a substitute for in-person probation meetings, which he deemed indispensable.
While online emotional assessments present future possibilities, a caution against excessive reliance on tech for offender monitoring was voiced. The prospect of deviating from human-centered supervision could be a concerning trajectory if taken to extremes by future administrations.