As the Notting Hill Carnival prepares to fill the streets of West London with vibrant sounds, colors, and the spirit of Caribbean heritage over the August bank holiday weekend, the Metropolitan Police’s decision to deploy live facial recognition (LFR) technology has ignited a fierce debate. With more than one million revelers expected to attend, the Met’s approach to security—particularly the use of instant face-matching cameras—has become a lightning rod for controversy, drawing sharp criticism from civil rights groups, politicians, and community members who fear the technology’s implications for privacy and racial fairness.
Sir Mark Rowley, Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, has been at the eye of the storm. On August 19, 2025, Rowley publicly defended the use of LFR, stating the technology would be employed “without bias” and only in a “non-discriminatory way.” In a letter responding to mounting concerns, he insisted, “Our aim is to ensure that carnival remains a safe and inclusive celebration for all. It is our operational judgement that LFR has an important role to play in delivering on this aim.” According to Rowley, the technology’s algorithm was chosen "with care" and does not perform in a way that exhibits bias.
The Met’s plan involves deploying LFR cameras on the approaches to and from the carnival, but not within the event’s boundaries. These cameras will be linked to a watch list of individuals wanted by police for a range of offences. If someone passes a camera and their facial measurements match those in the database, officers are alerted to stop and question them. The Met says this system is designed to help locate dangerous individuals and keep the event secure after last year’s carnival was marred by violence—including two fatal stabbings, eight non-fatal stabbings, and 349 arrests for offences ranging from sexual assault to violent disorder. As Rowley put it, “The public rightly expects the [Met] to use all necessary and proportionate tools to help ensure events like carnival can take place safely.”
Yet, the deployment of LFR at Notting Hill Carnival has drawn intense opposition from a coalition of eleven civil rights and anti-racism organizations, including Liberty, Big Brother Watch, Race on the Agenda, and the Runnymede Trust. In an open letter, these groups called LFR “a mass surveillance tool that treats all carnival-goers as potential suspects” and warned that it “has no place at one of London’s biggest cultural celebrations.” The letter argued that the technology has a “well-documented history of inaccurate outcomes and racial bias,” particularly affecting women and people of color. The groups further noted that the risk of discrimination “is not only about algorithms” but also about how watchlists are constructed and where the technology is deployed.
Rebecca Vincent, interim director at Big Brother Watch, voiced her disappointment in the Met’s decision, saying, “We all want criminals off the streets, but turning carnival into a mass police line-up is not the way to do it.” The concerns are not merely theoretical. The groups referenced a recent legal action involving a Black British man who was wrongly identified by LFR, detained, and fingerprinted—a stark reminder of the technology’s potential for error and harm.
Green Party London Assembly Member Zoë Garbett was especially critical of the move, questioning, “How is it justifiable that people celebrating their heritage, dancing in the streets, wearing traditional clothing, attending with their family and friends, should be scanned and tracked like potential criminals?” Garbett pointed to the event’s roots in anti-racist history and Black Caribbean culture, arguing that the decision “marks a dangerous step toward normalising invasive surveillance technology.” She also highlighted the lack of clarity about where the cameras would be placed, given the sprawling nature of the carnival, and warned that the deployment “all feels rushed and massively targeted.”
Data compiled by City Hall Green researchers and reported by The Voice adds weight to these concerns. Over half of the 180 facial recognition deployments in London last year took place in areas with higher-than-average Black populations, such as Thornton Heath (40.1% Black population), Northumberland Park (36%), and Deptford High Street (34%). In Croydon, a borough with a significant Black community, 128,518 faces were scanned for just 133 arrests—meaning that over 120,000 people were surveilled without resulting in any action against them. Critics say these figures reveal a troubling pattern of disproportionate surveillance in communities already facing systemic inequalities and over-policing.
The Met, for its part, insists the technology has come a long way since its early trials at the carnival in 2016 and 2017, which “did not build public confidence.” Sir Mark Rowley acknowledged, “At that time, the technology was in its early stages and the algorithm’s performance was limited. The legal and oversight position was also very different. Since then, we’ve made considerable progress. The current version of the algorithm is significantly improved, has undergone independent testing and validation, and now performs to a much higher standard.” The force points to the success of LFR in other high-profile events, such as the coronation and Trooping the Colour, and emphasizes that its use is governed by data protection and equality laws.
Operationally, the Met plans to deploy about 7,000 officers and staff each day during the carnival. The use of LFR is part of a broader strategy to address rising crime: since the start of 2024, weekly LFR deployments in London have doubled to ten, resulting in 1,035 offenders being apprehended and 773 charges or cautions. More than 100 suspects have been arrested for serious offences like rape, stalking, and domestic abuse against women and girls, according to police data.
The debate over facial recognition technology extends beyond the carnival. In the retail sector, the UK system Facewatch reported its highest-ever monthly total of suspect alerts in July 2025, flagging 43,602 individuals—a 134.8% increase from the previous year. Facewatch CEO Nick Fisher described this as “a further stark warning that retailers and their employees are facing unprecedented levels of criminal activity, including violent and aggressive behaviour.” But civil liberties advocates warn that such technology “turns shoppers into walking barcodes and makes us a nation of suspects, with devastating consequences for people’s lives when it inevitably makes mistakes.”
As the Notting Hill Carnival approaches, the question of how to balance public safety with civil liberties and community trust remains unresolved. The controversy surrounding LFR at this year’s event is a microcosm of a broader national debate: how far should society go in embracing new surveillance technologies, and at what cost to privacy, equality, and the very spirit of celebration?
