"Ahead of that debate, EFF and 12 other civil society organizations wrote to politicians in the country urging MPs to reject the Labour government's newly announced digital ID proposal. The UK's Prime Minister Keir Starmer pitched the scheme as a way to "cut the " in proving people's identities by creating a virtual ID on personal devices with information like names, date of birth, nationality, photo, and residency status to verify their right to live and work in the country."
"But the case for digital identification has not been made. As in our joint briefing, the proposal follows a troubling global trend : governments introducing expansive digital identity systems that are structurally incompatible with a rights-respecting democracy. The UK's plan raises six interconnected concerns: Mission creep Infringements on privacy rights Serious security risks Reliance on inaccurate and unproven technologies Discrimination and exclusion The deepening of entrenched power imbalances between the state and the public."
"Digital ID schemes don't simply verify who you are-they redefine who can access services and what those services look like. They become a gatekeeper to essential societal infrastructure, enabling governments and state agencies to close doors as easily as they open them. And they disproportionately harm those already at society's margins, including people seeking asylum and undocumented communities, who already face heightened surveillance and risk."
Parliament convened to debate a petition signed by almost 2.9 million people calling for an end to a national digital ID rollout. EFF and 12 civil society organizations urged MPs to reject the Labour government's newly announced digital ID proposal. Prime Minister Keir Starmer pitched a virtual ID stored on personal devices containing names, dates of birth, nationality, photo, and residency status to verify the right to live and work. The proposal follows a global trend of expansive digital identity systems and raises six interconnected concerns: mission creep; privacy infringements; security risks; reliance on unproven technologies; discrimination and exclusion; and deeper state-public power imbalances. Digital ID schemes can become gatekeepers to essential services and disproportionately harm marginalized groups, coercing participation to access public life.
Read at Electronic Frontier Foundation
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]