Justice Committee

Meeting date: Tuesday, May 15, 2018

Official Report 525KB pdf

Justice Sub-Committee on Policing (Report Back)

Agenda item 3 is feedback from the Justice Sub-Committee on Policing’s meeting of 10 May 2018. Following the verbal report, there will be an opportunity for brief comments or questions. I refer members to paper 3, which is a note by the clerk. I invite John Finnie to provide the feedback.

As members will be aware, the Justice Sub-Committee on Policing took evidence on Police Scotland’s proposed use of digital device triage systems, which the press refer to more commonly as cyberkiosks, and people may be more familiar with that term.

We took evidence from two individuals: Detective Superintendent Burnett, from Police Scotland, and Mr Kenneth Hogg, who is the interim chief officer at the Scottish Police Authority. We were interested in the acquisition of the equipment and what assessments had been done in advance of that. It turns out that, on 2 May, the Scottish Police Authority agreed Police Scotland’s three-year implementation plan, “Serving a Changing Scotland: Creating capacity to improve”. The plan includes a proposal to manage cybercrime with kiosks to triage data from devices.

In 2016, Police Scotland conducted trials of the Cellebrite digital device triage system in Edinburgh and Stirling. The sub-committee requested information on the analysis undertaken and whether any issues were raised. We heard that no human rights, data protection or community impact assessments were undertaken prior to the trials.

Police Scotland has selected the Cellebrite product and anticipates rolling out 41 kiosks across the force area later this year. It has assured us that those assessments will be undertaken, that officers will be trained and that issues will be addressed before the roll-out. The anticipated introduction date is autumn 2018.

There has been a cumulative spend of about £1 million, and the trials involved interaction with more than 600 devices, including SIM cards.

It is fair to say that members had a considerable number of questions as a result of the evidence, which have been included in a lengthy letter that has been sent to Police Scotland. We are seeking to be reassured; I certainly was not reassured by what I heard in the evidence-taking session—the evidence simply raised more questions.

The sub-committee also considered our forward work programme and agreed to schedule an evidence-taking session on Police Scotland’s firearms licensing process. We will also be returning to Police Scotland’s digital, data and information and communications technology strategy prior to the summer recess.

I am happy to take questions.

Do members have any questions or comments?

I echo John Finnie’s sentiments in relation to the conclusion of the evidence-taking session. As he rightly said, more questions were raised than were necessarily answered. I think that we all accepted that clear benefits from the use of the technology were outlined, but we all seized on the need to ensure that all appropriate safeguards are in place before national roll-out.

It was the case that the witnesses were unable to answer certain questions. The committee was concerned that procurement seemed to have taken place before the organisations had looked at how data is stored and what any pitfalls might be. The subject was a good one to look at, and the sub-committee will pursue it.

That concludes the public part of the meeting. Our next meeting will be on Tuesday, 22 May, when we will continue our evidence taking on the Management of Offenders (Scotland) Bill.