Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Law Enforcement in Australia and Canada: Governance Through ‘Privacy’ in an Era of Counter-Law?

  • Adam Molnar
  • Christopher Parsons
Chapter

Abstract

Comparing Australian and Canadian government attempts to regulate aerial surveillance technology provides an interesting window into how unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) surveillance, and surveillance technologies more broadly, are enabled and constrained by factors beyond the conventional purview of national security and law enforcement activities. This chapter examines current uses of UAVs in Australia and Canada, and considers the associated legal, privacy and social implications of their use in each jurisdiction. The chapter considers how institutional drivers and regulatory responses to UAV technologies in each country—shaped by a configuration of transport safety requirements, privacy regimes, technical developments, laws, and social norms—inform different pathways of emergence of UAV technologies and strategies of surveillance in national security and law enforcement.

References

  1. Austin, Lisa M. 2015. Lawful Illegality: What Snowden Has Taught Us about the Legal Infrastructure of the Surveillance State. In Law, Privacy and Surveillance in Canada in the Post-Snowden Era, ed. Michael Geist, 103–126. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar
  2. Australian Law Review Commission. 2008, August 12. For Your Information: Australian Privacy Law and Practice (ALRC Report 108). Canberra: ALRC. http://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/privacy-resources/privacy-fact-sheets/other/privacy-fact-sheet-17-australian-privacy-principles.
  3. Barr, Alistair and Reed Albergotti. 2014. Google to Buy Titan Aerospace as Web Giants Battle for Air Superiority. The Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304117904579501701702936522. Accessed 23 May 2014.
  4. Bennett, C.J. 2011. In Defence of Privacy: The Concept and the Regime. Surveillance & Society 8(4): 485–496.Google Scholar
  5. Bochenski, Natalie. 2015. Queensland Police Recruit Drones in Forensic First. Brisbane Times, May 28. http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/. Accessed 11 July 2015.
  6. Bowling, Ben, and James Sheptycki. 2015. Global Policing and Transnational Rule with Law. Transnational Legal Theory 6(1): 141–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bracken-Roche, Ciara , David Lyon, Mark James Mansour, Adam Molnar, Alana Saulnier, and Scott Thompson. 2014. Surveillance Drones: Privacy Implications of the Spread of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in Canada. A Report to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. Kingston: Surveillance Studies Centre, Queen’s University.Google Scholar
  8. British Columbia Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. 2012, November 15. Use of Automated License Plate Recognition Technology by the Victoria Police Department: Investigation Report F12-04. Victoria: BCOIPC. https://www.oipc.bc.ca/investigation-reports/1480. Accessed 13 July 2015.
  9. Butler, Des. 2014. The Dawn of the Age of the Drones: An Australian Privacy Law Perspective. UNSW Law Journal 37(2): 434–470.Google Scholar
  10. Canadian Civil Liberties Association. 2004, March 24. R. v. Tessling: Police Searches with Infra-Red Camera. Toronto: Canadian Civil Liberties Association. http://ccla.org/2004/03/24/r-v-tessling-police-searches-with-​infra-​red-cameras/. Accessed 24 Sep 2013.
  11. Cowan, Paris. 2014. Qld Police Drone Options Take Off. IT News, March 24. http://www.itnews.com.au/News/375818,qld-police-drone-operations-take-off.aspx. Accessed 14 July 2015.
  12. Dorling, Philip. 2014. Federal Police Want to Use Military Drones to Spy on Australians from the Sky. The Sydney Morning Herald, February 11. http://www.smh.com.au/. Accessed 12 July 2015.
  13. Ericson, Richard V. 2006. Security, Surveillance and Counter-Law. Criminal Justice Matters 68(1): 6–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ———. 2007. Crime in an Insecure World. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  15. Finn, Rachel L., and David Wright. 2012. Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Surveillance, Ethics and Privacy in Civil Applications. Computer Law and Security Review 28: 184–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Geist, Michael. 2015. Why Watching the Watchers Isn’t Enough: Canadian Surveillance Law in the Post-Snowden Era. In Law, Privacy and Surveillance in Canada in the Post-Snowden Era, ed. Michael Geist, 225–256. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar
  17. Gilliom, John. 2011. A Response to Bennett’s ‘in Defence of Privacy. Surveillance & Society 8(4): 500–504.Google Scholar
  18. Haggerty, Kevin D., and Richard V. Ericson. 2000. The Surveillant Assemblage. British Journal of Sociology 51(4): 605–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Klan, Anthony. 2014. CASA Rejects Drone Control Role. The Australian, March 7. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/casa-rejects-drone-control-role/story-e6frg95x-1226847372175. Accessed 22 July 2015.
  20. Lippert, R., and K. Walby. 2016. Governing Through Privacy: Authoritarian Liberalism, Law, and Privacy Knowledge. Law Culture and the Humanities 12(2): 329–352.Google Scholar
  21. Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC). 2014. Privacy fact sheet 17: Australian Privacy Principles. OAIC Website. http://www.oaic.gov.au/. Accessed 23 July 2015.
  22. ———. 2015. Which Law Enforcement Agencies Are Covered by the Privacy Act? OAIC Website http://www.oaic.gov.au/. Accessed 12 Aug 2015.
  23. Parliament of Canada. 2015. Bill C-51, Anti-Terrorism Act. 2nd Session, 41st Parliament, 20 January (1st reading). http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=6932136&Col=1&File=4.
  24. Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia. 2014. Report: Eyes in the Sky, Inquiry into Drones and the Regulation of Air Safety and Privacy. Canberra: House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, 14 July. Accessed Aug 2014.Google Scholar
  25. Parsons, Christopher. 2015a. Beyond Privacy: Articulating the Broader Harms of Pervasive Mass Surveillance. Media and Communication 3(3): 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. ———. 2015b. The Governance of Telecommunications Surveillance: How Opaque and Unaccountable Practices and Policies Threaten Canadians. Telecom Transparency Project. http://www.telecomtransparency.org/release-the-governance-of-telecommunications-surveillance/. Accessed 12 July 2015.
  27. Parsons, Christopher and Adam Molnar. 2013. Watching Below: Dimensions of Surveillance-by-UAVs in Canada. Block G Privacy and Security Report. Toronto. http://www.blockg.ca/portfolio.
  28. Parsons, Christopher, Colin Bennett, and Adam Molnar. 2015. Privacy, Surveillance, and the Democratic Potential of the Social Web. In Social Dimensions of Privacy: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, eds. Beate Roessler and Dorota Mokrosinksa, 202–222. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Parsons, Christopher, Joseph Savirimuthu, Rob Wipond, and Kevin McArthur. 2012. ANPR: Code and Rhetorics of Compliance. European Journal of Law and Technology 3(3). http://ejlt.org/article/view/164/256.
  30. Quan, Douglas. 2014. RCMP Drone Expansion Comes with Hefty Price Tag, Prompts Concerns of ‘Mission Creep.’ National Post, December 31. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/rcmp-drone-expansion-comes-with-hefty-price-tag-prompts-concerns-of-mission-creep. Accessed 11 July 2015.
  31. RCMP. 2014. Access to Information Request, A-2013-06427.Google Scholar
  32. RCMP “O” Division Fact Sheet. RCMP Website. Date Modified 2015-08-06. http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/on/about-apropos/fs-fd-eng.htm. Accessed 10 July 2015.
  33. Reiner, Robert. 2010. The Politics of the Police. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Roessler, Beate, and Dorota Mokrosinska, eds. 2015. Social Dimensions of Privacy: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Smith, Stephen Francis. 2012, October 2. Australian Minister of Defence: Rules to Protect the Privacy of Australians. http://www.defence.gov.au/AGO/library/ago-privacy-rules.pdf. Accessed 23 June 2015.
  36. Stewart, Cameron. 2014. $3bn plan for drone force to patrol our borders. The Australian, February 15. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/. Accessed 12 July 2015.
  37. United States Government Accountability Office. 2012. Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Measuring Progress and Addressing Potential Privacy Concerns Would Facilitate Integration into the National Airspace System. Report to the Congressional Requestors, GAO-12-981, September. http://www.gao.gov/assets/650/648348.pdf. Accessed 24 Aug 2015.

Legislation

  1. Australian Federal Police Act 1979 (Cth). http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/afpa1979225/. Accessed 12 July 2015.
  2. Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) s.37. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/foia1982222/s37.html. Accessed 12 Aug 2015.
  3. Privacy Act, RSC 1985, c. P-21. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-21. Accessed 12 July 2015.
  4. Surveillance Devices Act 2004 (Cth). http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/sda2004210/. Accessed 12 July 2015.

Cases

  1. R. v. Dyment. 1988. 2 SCR 417 at 427. http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/375/index.do. Accessed 10 July 2015.
  2. R. v. Tessling. 2004. SCC 67 at 55. http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2183/index.do. Accessed 9 July 2014.
  3. R. v. Spencer. 2014. 2 SCR 212. https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/14233/index.do. Accessed 8 July 2015.
  4. R. v. Wise. 1992. 1 SCR 527. http://scc.lexum.org/en/1992/1992scr1-527/1992scr1-527.html. Accessed 6 July 2015.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adam Molnar
    • 1
  • Christopher Parsons
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of CriminologyDeakin UniversityBurwoodAustralia
  2. 2.Munk School of Global AffairsUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations