UK Gangs Matrix database accused of being "not fit for purpose"
London police's Gangs Violence Matrix is racially discriminatory, incompatible with international human rights law, and not fit for purpose , according to a report by Amnesty International. The report found that 78 percent of the individuals on the Gangs Matrix were Black, which was disproportionate to both London's Black population (13 percent) and the percentage of Black people responsible for serious youth violence (27 percent). Amnesty also discovered that 40 percent of people listed had no record of involvement in violent offenses in the past two years, and 35 percent had never committed any serious offence. In addition, Amnesty accused London's Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) of unreasonably conflating youth culture with crime, poorly defining the concepts of "gang" and "gang member", leading to the arbitrary identification of individuals and to stigmatisation and other negative consequences. It also took issue with the criteria used for adding and removing people from the database, which it argued were unclear, and discovered that children as young as 12-years-old were included. Futhermore , information was being shared with various government agencies, potentially impacting individuals' access to services like housing and education, Amnesty said. ➕ May 2018. The UK Information Commissioner's Office said it was "in contact with the Metropolitan Police Service as part of an investigation into their use of a gangs database". System 🤖 Gangs Violence Matrix Documents 📃 Metropolitan Police. Gangs Violence Matrix Operator: Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Developer: Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Country: UK Sector: Govt - police Purpose: Predict gang violence risk Technology: Ranking algorithm Issue: Bias/discrimination; Human/civil rights; Privacy
- Date it happened
- 2018-05-01
- Organisation involved
- Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)
- Product, system or model
- Gangs Violence Matrix
This incident was imported from AIAAIC and is used under CC BY-SA 4.0. Our additions to it — the structured fields, the translation, the checks against other reports — are published under the same licence.
This is a record of what was reported, not a finding that anyone broke the law. If it names your organisation and you believe it is wrong, the corrections process is free and open to everyone.