Homo Carded: Exception and Identity Systems

Abstract

The issue of ‘function creep’ is one of the most recurring concerns in the debates surrounding the implications of biometric technology and ID cards systems. Underlying these concerns is the fear that the use of biometrics may overflow beyond its originally intended purposes, especially where the concept of ‘interoperability’¹ and technologies of ‘networked’ databases are involved (van der Ploeg, 2005b: 13). To be sure, this concern over the function creep of biometric technology is all too often articulated in relation to the increase in surveillance practices, and more specifically, in relation to the issue of privacy and the problem of data misuse. Thus the debate over function creep continues to be largely confined to what technology can and cannot do, and what possible uses and scenarios may ensue. As the following statements indicate:

‘Function creep’ is an important concern, i.e. that technology and processes introduced for one purpose will be extended to other purposes which were not discussed or agreed upon at the time of their implementation.

(European Commission, 2005a: 16)

Just as function creep implies that biometrics will gradually (and innocently) grow to be used by zealous, well-meaning bureaucrats in numerous, creative ways in multiple fora, function creep will also enable the Government to reduce further over time the citizenry’s reasonable expectations of their privacy.

(Woodward, 1998: 12)