The government will use AI technology to verify the age of migrants who have arrived in the UK trying to stop adults by pretending to be children.
A report conducted by the government's independent immigration inspectors found cases where adult immigrants were classified as children and cases where child immigrants were misclassified as adults.
However, the asylum system makes it easier for children to apply for stays, with 56% of immigrants who claimed to be children being adults last year being either rated as adults or later recognized as over 18 years old.
BBC News understands the government's plans to use existing technology created for online retailers selling age-restricted products.
Border Patrol and Asylum Officer Angela Eagle said AI is trained with images of millions of faces and “can generate age estimates with known accuracy for individuals whose age is unknown or contested.”
Estimating facial age provides a “potentially quick and simple means” to test judgments when assessing age, Eagle said.
Currently, immigration staff and social workers need to create an assessment of the actual age of immigrants who claim to be under the age of 18, but both the Home Office and the independent immigration inspectors say accurate assessments of age is “challenging.”
David Bolt, the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, said there was no lack of a “failure test” for ages, “it is inevitable that age ratings are incorrect.”
In a sample of 100 case files, inspectors found that of 38 of the 38 who were initially rated as adults by the Ministry of Home Affairs, 22 were later rated by the local government as under the age of 18.
Bolt's report was prepared before the government announced plans for AI facial recognition.
The government said it would try out technology ahead of the 2026 excluded deployment. Bids for technology providers will begin in August.
Similar technologies are already used in the private sector by banks and online retailers, identifying the age of customers who purchase products such as knives.
The government is now encouraging companies that have developed the technology to participate in the home office procurement process.
A senior home office source said he hopes to “harness the power of the private sector” by working with companies that “invest in billions of people in this.”
Previous conservative governments introduced plans to examine the bones and teeth of some migrants to verify their age.
However, the Minister of Labor is believed to be skeptical of the plan as he wanted a verification system that could be taken to separate facilities and used at the border.
Bolt's report states that the protection risks of children who were falsely rated as having to share rooms with adult strangers and adults who were falsely rated as children placed with other children are falsely rated.
Inspectors highlighted the case of the arrival of a small boat of a man who claimed he was 17 years old. He rated him as 22 years old due to his physical characteristics such as “deep voice,” “fully developed facial structure,” and “thick black stubble.”
He criticized the Home Office's use of “general physical characteristics” and “does not take into account the individual circumstances of young people.”
The report said some migrants signed the “age statement” form without a proper understanding of what they signed after long and often frequent journeys. This later led to a contestation of age.
The report also criticized the immigration officials' “lack of curiosity” regarding the decision to assess the age that was later reversed, and criticised that no lessons were learned from the decision that was reversed.
The government has accepted all eight recommendations Mr Bolt made in his report, including increased training and improved communication for immigration officers.
Ember Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said he is “not sure” that using AI tools is the right approach.
He said the inspector's report highlighted concerns that children are in danger and “these techniques continue to raise serious questions about accuracy, ethics and fairness.”
