News in the Facial Recognition System

The measure responds to different cases in which individuals other than those wanted by the authorities were delayed by the security forces. The error was identified in the personal data included in the CONARC database, since the identifying data of some of the people wanted by the authorities was wrong (for example, the ID number was assigned to a different individual or, even, in many cases, no ID number was assigned at all, identifying the individuals only by their first and last name). As the CONARC database is made of notices that judicial authorities make of any ambulatory freedom restrictions, issued in the context of a criminal case, the Directorate attributed the mistakes in the personal data in those judicial communications. In particular, the mistakes were due to failure to fulfill Law No. 22,117 which establishes the precatory measures that the judicial authorities must take when communicating to the National Recidivism Registry the data of those who are wanted by the justice such as, for example, name and surname, date of birth and number of identity documents of the accused.

The error in the database caused problems in different jurisdictions of the country, where arrests and delays of wrong individuals took place. This situation was more noticeable in the City of Buenos Aires where the Fugitive Facial Recognition System is used (for more information see the Marval News publication https://www.marval.com/publicacion/reconocimiento-facial-en-la-ciudad-de-buenos-aires-13374&lang=en). This system combines the CONARC database with the images contained in the National Registry of Individuals (“RENAPER”, after its acronym in Spanish) in order to identify individuals wanted by the authorities. By using fugitive facial recognition technology, through video surveillance cameras, the system recognizes the faces of the people wanted by court order, according to their registration in CONARC. As the CONARC database had erroneous or incomplete information, when this information was crossed with RENAPER, in certain cases, the wrong person was arrested.

Consequently, the Directorate in order to avoid further detentions, apprehensions or arrests of wrong individuals, issued the Resolution and ordered the suspension of the publication of those individuals included in CONARC whose identifying data prevented their correct identification, indicating that the suspension would be maintained until the jurisdictional bodies, that had requested the inclusion of these individuals in CONARC, proceeded to rectify or ratify the referred data or expressly requested to keep it in its original terms.

Finally, and with the objective of avoiding these errors in the future, the Resolution added a new control when requesting the inclusion of people in the registry: the User Service Department and the Nominative and Fingerprint Registry Office are obliged to, prior to the publication in the CONARC of the individuals wanted by courts order, to confront the data with the data in the RENAPER so that, in case of errors in the reported data, corrections are required of the referring magistrate that are necessary.