Before NSW expands police drones, it needs to answer some important questions

NSW Minister for Police and Counter-terrorism Yasmin Catley (r). (AAP Image/Paul Braven)
We all have a human right to safety. To deliver this, police need appropriate tools to prevent crime and respond quickly to critical incidents. Emerging technologies, including drones, can play an important role in achieving these goals.

The NSW Police drone trial in Moree deserves careful consideration. If the evidence shows that drone technology has helped police prevent crime and improve community safety, that is a positive outcome. Using drones to provide rapid response support to frontline officers may offer significant benefits, particularly in regional and remote areas.

Having worked closely with police and victims of crime as a state prosecutor, I understand the importance of effective policing and ensuring police have the tools they need to do their job well. But I also know that public trust is essential. New powers and technologies are most effective when communities trust they are used fairly and with appropriate safeguards.

That is why I am concerned about the NSW government’s recent announcement that the Moree drone program will be extended for a further two years.  The announcement also indicates the trial may expand to other locations across the state — both decisions about expansion were made while the trial evaluation is still underway. Surely the evidence should be considered before any decision is made?

The key question is not simply the ‘operational effectiveness of the technology’, which is what the current evaluation is looking at. The more important questions are how the drones have been used, what safeguards are in place, and what impact they have had on the communities being monitored.

If community safety were the only consideration, the logical conclusion would be to continuously surveil all of us, everywhere, all the time. Few people would accept that. Not because safety is unimportant, but because Australians also value privacy, freedom, and the ability to go about their daily lives without constant monitoring.

The challenge is to find the right balance. We should embrace technologies that help keep communities safe, but we should also expect governments to explain where the limits are, and what safeguards will be put in place to prevent overreach.

From the beginning, concerns about the Moree trial have centred on reports that the drones were being used not only to support incident responses but also to conduct proactive aerial surveillance of the community. Generalised and continuous monitoring raises legitimate questions about where the limits of police surveillance should lie.

Proactive aerial surveillance also raises broader questions about community trust and confidence in policing. The impact of surveillance is not measured solely by the number of arrests or crimes prevented. It also depends on whether communities believe new powers are being used fairly and transparently.

In a town like Moree, careful consideration must be given to how expanded surveillance may affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and broader perceptions of equal treatment.

Importantly, recognising these risks is not the same as opposing the technology.

In fact, public trust is more likely to be strengthened when governments openly consider both the benefits and the risks of new policing tools. Communities are far more likely to support new technologies when they can see that proper safeguards exist, and that potential impacts have been carefully assessed.

That is why the evaluation of the Moree drone trial needs to do more than measure ‘the operational effectiveness of the technology’. The NSW government should broaden the evaluation to include human rights considerations. It should examine privacy implications, impacts on community trust, risks of discrimination, and whether existing oversight arrangements are adequate.

It should also commit to publishing the full findings. If surveillance drones are going to become a permanent feature of policing in NSW, communities deserve the opportunity to see the evidence and understand the basis for that decision.

Finally, safeguards must be legislated before any further rollout. Parliament should establish a clear and comprehensive legislative framework for police drone use.

While existing surveillance laws regulate some aspects of these activities, they leave important questions about permissible uses, data handling, transparency and independent oversight unresolved.

Effective policing and human rights should never be treated as competing priorities. We should expect both.

About Lorraine Finlay, Human Rights Commissioner

Lorraine Finlay

Human Rights Commissioner

Lorraine Finlay, Human Rights Commissioner, brings legal and academic expertise to protect freedoms and promote justice across Australia.

Learn more about Lorraine Finlay

Media contact

Email: media@humanrights.gov.au or phone: 0457 281 897