Overlooked - Liberty

56 Overlooked: Surveillance and personal privacy in modern Britain
available to anyone who wished to see them. This does not make us criminals. ‘Nothing to hide,
nothing to fear’ is invariably accompanied by the observation that many other countries have ID
cards. Overlooking the differences that exist between the NIR and the schemes operating in other
countries, this is a double-edged argument. Many countries with ID card schemes have experienced
problems arising from excessive or discriminatory use of police and immigration officials’ powers to
demand identification from minority ethnic groups.
In order to counteract concerns over arbitrary and discriminatory demands for identification, the
IDCA contains safeguards to protect against forced production of a card. Section 13 (3) specifically
excludes the making of regulations which would require a person to carry an ID card at all times.
Meanwhile Section 16 (2) creates a bar on any requirement that a person be required to produce a
card. The combination of these two protections would appear to ensure that people will not be
required to produce ID cards to the police or immigration services.
However, upon closer examination these safeguards are not as watertight as they originally appear.
Section13 (3) might prevent regulations being passed requiring production. However, this only
means that laws cannot be put into place expressly forcing people to produce cards. It does not
prevent cards being used as a matter of course to establish identification. Section 16 might seem
to provide some assistance as it does contain such a prohibition. However, there are a number of
exemptions. In particular, Section 16 (3) removes the bar on production if a person is of a description
of those who are subject to compulsory registration. It could be argued that what now constitutes
compulsory registration might now be a moot point. For most of the Bill’s progress, it contained a
power for the Secretary of State to force compulsion by naming particular groups. The plan seemed
to envisage initial designation of asylum seekers or refugees, then those from outside the European
Economic Area. This would be followed by those from the EEA, and finally British citizens on a rollout
according to age 122 . However, this power was removed in order for the bill to receive Royal
Assent. New legislation will be needed to force compulsion. What ‘compulsion’ means is debatable,
as anyone who is required to register on the NIR when applying for their passport has no choice.
They are effectively being compelled. In other words anyone registered this way might be considered
‘compelled’ for the purposes of Section 16 (3).
In any event it is clear the Government intends that everyone be eventually compelled to register.
Designating passports will ensure that most people register but there will always be a few who do
not have passports and who never will. The only way to ensure universal compulsion is by
compelling registration.
When legislation is introduced allowing compulsion, roll-out is likely to then take place according to
age as originally planned. This means that eventually everyone will be ‘of a description of individuals
subject to compulsory registration’ and will fall into the exemption provided by Section 16 (3). In
other words, no-one will be able to rely on the prohibition not to produce cards.
So does this mean that production of ID cards might be required as a matter of course The
Government might maintain that this will not happen, but the application of standard policing
powers suggests it might well.
122
There were some problems with this, in particular how Irish citizens would be treated, but this appeared to
be the basic plan.