UK Home Office Faces Backlash Over Plans to Use AI to Guess Age of Young Asylum Seekers

The UK Home Office plans to implement facial age estimation (FAE) AI technology to determine the age of young asylum seekers starting in 2027, according to Human Rights Watch. Internal Home Office tests found the technology performed worse on certain groups, specifically Africans, prompting Human Rights Watch, Foxglove, and 61 other civil society organizations to demand the plan be scrapped on June 19, 2026.

The 63 organizations sent a letter to the Home Office calling for an immediate halt to the program. They argue the technology creates unnecessary risks for vulnerable young people and lacks the legal justification and accountability mechanisms required for such high-stakes decisions.

Why are civil society groups opposing the AI age estimation?

Opponents argue that using FAE to determine asylum status is dangerous because the technology is unreliable and untested for refugee processing. Human Rights Watch reports that the Home Office’s own testing revealed the AI is less accurate when assessing certain ethnic groups, notably people of African descent.

The coalition of groups is asking the UK government to address urgent questions regarding the system’s efficacy and the risk of discrimination. They claim the Home Office is presenting the technology as a solution to complex migration issues and a tool to increase deportations while characterizing asylum seekers as fraudulent.

“This technology has no place in deciding whether a young person can access the rights and protections they are entitled to.”

Human Rights Watch

How does the Home Office plan to use FAE technology?

The Home Office describes FAE as “cutting-edge AI tech.” While the government intends to use it for border and asylum processing by 2027, the technology is already active in the UK commercial sector. It is currently used in some shops and bars to verify the age of customers attempting to purchase age-restricted items.

Current Home Office guidance states the AI will only advise human decision-makers rather than replace them. However, civil society groups argue this “advisory” phase is often a precursor to full automation.

What are the risks of automation bias and global influence?

Human Rights Watch cites the Metropolitan Police’s use of facial recognition technology as a precedent for how pilot tests can expand. That system began as a trial and grew incrementally over a decade into widespread, always-on surveillance. The organization warns that as these systems become entrenched, “automation bias” increases, moving the technology’s role from advisory to authoritative.

There are also concerns that the UK’s adoption of FAE could set a global trend in migration policy. The report points to the now-shelved Rwanda Scheme, which Human Rights Watch says was mimicked by the governments of the United States and the Netherlands before being abandoned.

The coalition of 63 groups maintains that the risks of pursuing FAE extend beyond UK borders and urges the government to reconsider the implementation of the system.