Humanitarian data collection practices put migrants at risk

The collection of personal data about migrants, refugees and asylum seekers by humanitarian aid organisations is preventing these already vulnerable groups from accessing lifesaving goods and services, warns United Nations (UN) report.

Authored by the UN’s special rapporteur on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, Tendayi Achiume, the report, which was published 10 November, raises a number of concerns about the ways humanitarian organisations are collecting and using personal data, particularly biometric data, to deliver aid and provision services.

The report noted, for example, how the UN’s refugee agency (UNHCR) requires refugees returning to camps in Afghanistan to undergo mandatory iris scanning and registration as a prerequisite to receiving assistance.

“Though UNHCR justifies collecting, digitising and storing the refugees’ iris images … as a means of detecting and preventing fraud, the impact of processing such sensitive data can be grave when systems are flawed or abused,” said the report, adding that it has been documented that such biometric surveillance tools have led to refugees losing access to goods and services necessary for survival.

“In various forced migration and humanitarian aid settings, such as Mafraq, Jordan, biometric technologies are being used in the form of iris scanning in lieu of identity cards in exchange for food rations. However, conditioning food access on data collection removes any semblance of choice or autonomy on the part of refugees – consent cannot freely be given where the alternative is starvation.”

It added that an investigation into the trials of ‘biometric aid’ systems in the Azraq refugee camp in Jordan from May 2016 revealed many of the refugees interviewed were uncomfortable with using such technology, but felt that they could not refuse if they wanted to eat.

“The goal or promise of improved service delivery cannot justify the levels of implicit coercion underlying regimes such as these,” said the report, which also noted that, to date, the UN has collected biometric data on over eight million people, most of whom are fleeing conflict or in need of humanitarian assistance.

However, it is often unclear what happens to the various data collected about refugees, and whether those affected are able to access the highly sensitive information others hold about them.

Last year, for example, the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP) partnered with controversial data mining firm Palantir for a £34m contract that saw the organisations sharing data on 92 million aid recipients, of which at least 5.8 million are reported to contain fingerprints and photos.

“Private corporations such as Palantir have proved essential in providing the technology that supports the detention and deportation programs run by the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), raising justified concerns of corporate complicity in human rights violations associated with these programs,” said the report, adding that it is not yet clear what data sharing accountability mechanisms are in place, and whether migrants and refugees will be able to opt out.

“Data collection is not an apolitical exercise, especially when powerful Global North actors collect information on vulnerable populations with no regulated methods of oversights and accountability.”

The report goes on to say that the exclusion of refugees and asylum seekers from essential basic services as a result of data collection and sharing practices is not confined to refugee camp settings.

For example, while undocumented persons in Germany have the same right to healthcare as others, the social welfare office that administers their healthcare is legally obliged to report their personal data to immigration authorities.

This is likely to have a “chilling effect” on migrant and refugees’ use of these services, as it means accessing healthcare, through perfectly legal means, could result in immigration enforcement.