Essex Police has decided to halt the use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology due to concerns about accuracy and potential bias risks. The suspension of their LFR system, provided by Corsight, was disclosed in an audit report published by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The audit recommended that Essex Police address the identified risks before resuming any future deployments. The last recorded use of LFR by Essex Police was on August 26, 2025. It is unclear what specifically led to the suspension, but previous reports suggested that the force had not adequately assessed the discriminatory impacts of the technology. The force had been criticized for relying on insufficient equality impact assessments and misleading claims about the system's lack of bias. Following independent testing by the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) and Cambridge University, it was found that the LFR system had potential biases in identifying individuals based on gender and ethnicity. As a result of these findings, Essex Police decided to pause deployments and work with the software provider to address the issues before resuming operations. The Home Office recently launched a consultation on the use of LFR by UK police, acknowledging the need for clearer regulations and public confidence in the technology. Despite ongoing debates about the legal framework surrounding LFR, plans for a significant expansion of AI and facial recognition technologies in policing have already been announced. UK Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has expressed her vision of implementing AI and LFR technologies to create a surveillance system reminiscent of Jeremy Bentham’s “panopticon”. This concept, aimed at maintaining constant observation and control, has sparked discussions about the implications of increased surveillance in society. Overall, the decision by Essex Police to pause LFR deployments highlights the ongoing debate surrounding the use of facial recognition technology in law enforcement and the need for thorough assessments of its potential biases and impacts on civil liberties.