Body-Worn Cameras: Law, Policy, and Your Rights

Body-worn video (BWV) cameras are now standard issue for frontline officers in most forces in England and Wales. Their use is governed by a combination of the Data Protection Act 2018, the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice issued under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, the College of Policing's guidance on body-worn video, and individual force policies.

Officers are generally required to activate their cameras at the earliest opportunity when attending an incident, conducting a stop and search, making an arrest, or any other encounter that might result in the use of force or a complaint. The College of Policing guidance states that cameras should be switched on before engaging with the public where practicable. Some forces require continuous recording during public-facing duties; others require activation only when the officer judges that the encounter may need to be evidenced.

Footage from body-worn cameras is subject to the Data Protection Act 2018 and the UK GDPR. It constitutes personal data and its processing must be lawful, fair, and transparent. Individuals captured on BWV footage have the right to make a subject access request (SAR) to obtain a copy of the footage featuring them, subject to exemptions for law enforcement purposes. Forces must respond to SARs within one month. Footage is typically retained for 31 days unless it relates to an incident that is being investigated, in which case it is retained for the duration of the investigation and any subsequent proceedings.

Body-worn video has proved valuable in resolving complaints: footage provides an objective contemporaneous record of interactions. The IOPC encourages complainants to request that BWV footage be reviewed as part of the complaints process. Where an officer failed to activate their camera when policy required it, this may itself be a conduct matter. Officers must not review BWV footage before making their initial notes or statements about an incident unless authorised to do so, as this could compromise the evidential integrity of their account.