Police Use of Drones May Threaten Human Rights: UN Expert
Christof Heyns says legality of law enforcement use of remote-controlled weapons must be considered
The increasing use of drones by police forces and private security may pose a threat to human rights, a United Nations independent expert has said.
"An armed drone, controlled by a human from a distance, can hardly do what police officers are supposed to do--use the minimum force required by the circumstances," Christof Heyns, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, told a UN General Assembly committee Wednesday.
The right to life and human dignity must be considered above any added value of giving police these unmanned weapons, he said.
"The decreased personal involvement of police officers in the deployment of force raises the question, among others, of who is responsible if things go wrong," Heyns added.
The Special Rapporteur made the comments while presenting his report (pdf) on his activities to General Assembly.
That report notes that some uses of "less lethal" weapons--including rubber bullets, tear gas, water cannons and drones, have lead to death as well as injury. "The danger is that law enforcement officials may argue that the weapons that they use are labeled 'less lethal' and then fail to assess whether the level of force is not beyond that required," the report states.
"It should be asked whether remote-controlled weapons systems should be as readily viewed as legal weapons in the law enforcement context as in armed conflict," Heyns writes in his report.
Among the emerging technology noted in the report is a drone produced by Vanguard Defense Industries that "can be armed with 37-mm and 40-mm grenade launchers, a 12-gauge shotgun with laser designator or can be fitted with an XREP taser with the ability to fire four barbed electrodes that can be shot to a distance of 100 feet, delivering neuromuscular incapacitation to the victim."
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just three days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The increasing use of drones by police forces and private security may pose a threat to human rights, a United Nations independent expert has said.
"An armed drone, controlled by a human from a distance, can hardly do what police officers are supposed to do--use the minimum force required by the circumstances," Christof Heyns, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, told a UN General Assembly committee Wednesday.
The right to life and human dignity must be considered above any added value of giving police these unmanned weapons, he said.
"The decreased personal involvement of police officers in the deployment of force raises the question, among others, of who is responsible if things go wrong," Heyns added.
The Special Rapporteur made the comments while presenting his report (pdf) on his activities to General Assembly.
That report notes that some uses of "less lethal" weapons--including rubber bullets, tear gas, water cannons and drones, have lead to death as well as injury. "The danger is that law enforcement officials may argue that the weapons that they use are labeled 'less lethal' and then fail to assess whether the level of force is not beyond that required," the report states.
"It should be asked whether remote-controlled weapons systems should be as readily viewed as legal weapons in the law enforcement context as in armed conflict," Heyns writes in his report.
Among the emerging technology noted in the report is a drone produced by Vanguard Defense Industries that "can be armed with 37-mm and 40-mm grenade launchers, a 12-gauge shotgun with laser designator or can be fitted with an XREP taser with the ability to fire four barbed electrodes that can be shot to a distance of 100 feet, delivering neuromuscular incapacitation to the victim."
The increasing use of drones by police forces and private security may pose a threat to human rights, a United Nations independent expert has said.
"An armed drone, controlled by a human from a distance, can hardly do what police officers are supposed to do--use the minimum force required by the circumstances," Christof Heyns, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, told a UN General Assembly committee Wednesday.
The right to life and human dignity must be considered above any added value of giving police these unmanned weapons, he said.
"The decreased personal involvement of police officers in the deployment of force raises the question, among others, of who is responsible if things go wrong," Heyns added.
The Special Rapporteur made the comments while presenting his report (pdf) on his activities to General Assembly.
That report notes that some uses of "less lethal" weapons--including rubber bullets, tear gas, water cannons and drones, have lead to death as well as injury. "The danger is that law enforcement officials may argue that the weapons that they use are labeled 'less lethal' and then fail to assess whether the level of force is not beyond that required," the report states.
"It should be asked whether remote-controlled weapons systems should be as readily viewed as legal weapons in the law enforcement context as in armed conflict," Heyns writes in his report.
Among the emerging technology noted in the report is a drone produced by Vanguard Defense Industries that "can be armed with 37-mm and 40-mm grenade launchers, a 12-gauge shotgun with laser designator or can be fitted with an XREP taser with the ability to fire four barbed electrodes that can be shot to a distance of 100 feet, delivering neuromuscular incapacitation to the victim."