Palantir, a controversial US tech firm founded by billionaire Peter Thiel, has secured its first contract with a UK police force, Leicestershire Police, to provide a 'police intelligence and investigation platform,' raising ongoing concerns about data privacy...
Palantir is a controversial choice, as some community leaders, campaign groups and members of Parliament have raised concerns about giving the company access to public data. Aasiya Bora, a former Green party police and crime commissioner candidate, expressed serious concerns: “The idea that Palantir is now extending their reach into police data has to concern us. How will the data be used? Who will keep them accountable?”
... Palantir's tech is already in use in US police forces and has been accused of creating ‘racist’ feedback loops. According to experts, the technology has led to people in already over-policed neighbourhoods becoming targets for police abuse. Palantir has previously refused to comment on software it has provided to US police forces. There is no indication that this is the same tech in use at Leicestershire Police.
The company recently faced criticism over a multi-million pound NHS deal to join patient data between different NHS trusts, and was awarded several contracts during the pandemic without tender. Palantir's lack of track record in healthcare and murky links to US and UK spy agencies made it unfit to take on the job, according to campaigners. Palantir maintains that it has never had access to any identifiable medical records.
... More recently, leaked emails revealed that Palantir hired PR firm Topham Guerin to pay influencers to attack the Good Law Project, a not-for-profit campaign organisation, on social media. Good Law Project had been raising concerns about a £330m deal between Palantir and the government to process millions of NHS patient records. Jo Maugham, director at the Good Law Project, said “Palantir, in covertly paying influencers to smear us, ought to have disbarred itself from providing police intelligence services. If it is capable of dishonestly smearing its critics, why is it not capable of manufacturing intelligence about them?”