360 information
360Info is an open access global information agency of journalists working with academics to address the world’s biggest challenges and provide practical solutions
Show more
Comment
Artificial intelligence offers new possibilities to states assessing visa applications, bringing new urgency to the need for international standards, writes Elspeth Guild or Queen Mary in part three of a series on migration. Read parts one and two.
Opinion: Algorithms, artificial intelligence and machine learning permeated our daily lives, providing new amenities and new threats to our privacy.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the processing of the personal data of migrants. The data that was once collected on forms and stored away is now being digitized immediately – just last month, the US put an end to paper forms for non-citizen visitors traveling under its popular visa waiver program.
The alternative This form, online and fairly inexpensive, has become longer as more questions have been added over the years. Each additional question is designed to reveal more about the individual’s personal behavior, such as the destinations of previous travel or immigration records elsewhere. And this is a trend that is being repeated in more and more countries, including in the European Union, as it establishes its own travel authorization system.
The personal data requested for these forms is far more than would normally have been collected where a tourist presented themselves at a border without the pre-authorization procedure.
International standards are now needed to ensure that migrants are not the object of unfair data capture by states, whether they are traveling for tourism or other reasons.
People agree to give up their personal data because they want to travel. Those who want to move for a longer period of time usually need to get visas that require significantly more personal data, not only about them and their family members, but also sensitive information such as income, assets and tax returns. While citizens are generally protected from intrusive data interrogation when entering their own state because they have the right to enter, foreigners do not have such a shield. If they refuse to hand over their personal data to the authorities, they will not be able to travel.
In the past, this data was manually or electronically filed in a file specifically for the individual and was rarely consulted except in exceptional circumstances. But the development of new AI and machine learning technology has provided state authorities with a whole new set of possibilities.
Data collected for border and immigration purposes are used for multiple purposes, not all of which correspond to the reasons for which the data were first collected. The customs are also not necessarily benign. State authorities make decisions and discriminate on the basis of defective profiles.
In 2020, a report by the UK’s independent chief inspector of border authorities found that they were using an AI tool to classify visiting visa applications of citizens of certain countries according to profiles they had developed: Green (must be approved), Yellow (must be reviewed) and Red (recommended for bounce). But the tool has led to what has been described as racist decision-making: assumptions built into the profiles have led to bias in the assessment of applications. When challenged in court, the British government decided to withdraw the use of the instrument rather than try to defend its use before a judge.
In the private sector, data brokers face regulation of their data collection under national and international measures. But when the authority that collects personal data is the state and the purposes are opaque, not only does national constitutional protection come into play, but its applicability to migrants becomes critical.
States remain hungry for intrusive information about individuals ostensibly for the purpose of protecting national security. International standards are needed to ensure that they are no more likely to engage in discriminatory practices than to counteract real threats.
Elspeth Guild is a law professor at Queen Mary University of London. She is also a practicing lawyer at Kingsley Napley London. The author declares no conflict of interest.
This article is part of a Special Report on the ‘Changing Face of Migration’, produced in collaboration with the Calcutta Research Group.
Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info ™.