Regulation of Unmanned Aerial Systems and Related Privacy Issues in Lithuania

Open access

Abstract

In the past few years the use of unmanned aerial vehicles in Lithuania has significantly increased. However, enjoying the advantages of this technology, which improves society’s socio-economical safety (public safety in a broad sense), raises some privacy concerns. This article analyses European Union and national legal regulations regarding the use of unmanned aerial vehicles as well as legal tools for defence of the right to privacy or prevention from its breaches in the Republic of Lithuania. Unmanned aerial vehicles have become popular only recently; thus, legislation regarding their use has not yet become a common topic among lawyers. Furthermore, case law of the Republic of Lithuania is silent about it. Thus, the authors model a situation of breach of privacy using an unmanned aerial vehicle and analyse possible defence mechanisms.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. AUVSI. “Economic Impact of Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration in the United States.” Economic report by Darryl Jenkins & Bijan Vasigh (March 2013) // https://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/AUVSI/958c920a-7f9b-4ad2-9807-f9a4e95d1ef1/UploadedImages/New_Economic%20Report%202013%20Full.pdf.

  • 2. Braun Sven Friedewald Michael and Valkenburg Govert. “Civilizing Drones: Military Discourses Going Civil?” Science & Technology Studies 28(2) (2015): 73–87.

  • 3. Butler Des. “The Dawn of the Age of the Drones: an Australian Privacy Law Perspectives.” UNSW Law Journal 37(2) (2014): 434–469.

  • 4. CAA. “Bepiločiai orlaiviai (BPO) – naujas etapas aviacijos istorijoje” (Unmanned aerial systems – new stage in a history of aviation) // http://www.caa.lt/index.php?1863262406.

  • 5. DRONEZON. “How Do Drones Work and What Is Drone Technology” (May 2017) // https://www.dronezon.com/learn-about-drones-quadcopters/what-is-drone-technology-or-how-does-drone-technology-work/.

  • 6. ENISA. “Privacy and Data Protection by Design” (January 2015) // https://www.enisa.europa.eu/publications/privacy-and-data-protection-by-design).

  • 7. EU Open Data Portal. “Special Eurobarometer 432: Europeans’ attitudes towards security” (May 2015) // http://data.europa.eu/euodp/en/data/dataset/S2085_83_2_432_ENG/resource/ae0b54bc-3974-4165-9f7d-c2907cb3f41f.

  • 8. EU. “Commission Staff Working Document ‘Towards a European strategy for the development of civil applications of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS)’” (September 2012) // https://register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f=ST%2013438%202012%20INIT.

  • 9. EU. “Communication for the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council A New Era for Aviation. Opening the aviation market to the civil use of remotely piloted aircraft systems in a safe and sustainable manner” (April 2014) // http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0207&from=EN.

  • 10. EU. “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules in the field of civil aviation and A European Union Aviation Safety Agency and repealing Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council” (December 2016) // http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-15155-2016-INIT/en/pdf.

  • 11. EU. “Riga Declaration on Remotely Piloted Aircraft (drones) ‘Framing the Future of Aviation’” (March 2015) // https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/modes/air/news/doc/2015-03-06-drones/2015-03-06-riga-declaration-drones.pdf.

  • 12. EU. “Unmanned aircraft (drones)” // https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/uas_en.

  • 13. MAKEUSEOF. “8 Ways to Prevent Drones Infringing on Your Privacy” (March 2016) // http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/8-ways-prevent-drones-infringing-privacy/.

  • 14. McKown Martin. “The New Drone State: Suggestions for Legislatures Seeking to Limit Drone Surveillance by Government and Nongovernment Controllers.” University of Florida Journal of Law and Public Policy 26 (2015): 71–90.

  • 15. Norkūnas Algis. “Kaltė kaip civilinės atsakomybės pagrindas” (“Fault as the Basis of Civil Responsibility”). Jurisprudencija 28(20) (2002): 115–121.

  • 16. Vacek Joseph J. “Remote Sensing of Private Data by Drones Is Mostly Unregulated: Reasonable Expectations of Privacy Are at Risk Absent Comprehensive Federal Legislation.” North Dakota Law Review 90 (2014): 463–484.

  • 17. Villasenor John. “Observations from Above: Unmanned Aircraft Systems and Privacy.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 36 (2013): 457–517.

  • 18. Vosyliūtė Andželika. “Įsibrovimo į patalpą saugyklą ar saugomą teritoriją kaip vagystę kvalifikuojančio požymio samprata teisės moksle ir teismų praktikoje” (The concept of trespassing premises storage or secured territory as elements of aggravated theft under the theory of law and practice). Teisė 66(1) (2008): 75–94.

  • 1. Asmens duomenų teisinės apsaugos įstatymas (Law on Personal Data Legal Protection). Official Gazette latest amendment 2008 no. 22-804.

  • 2. Bepiločių orlaivių naudojimo taisyklės (The rules for the use of unmanned aircrafts). TAR 2014 no. 2014-00438.

  • 3. Č. S. v. I. L. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania 2015 no. 3K-3-430-415/2015.

  • 4. California v. Ciraolo. 1986 476 U.S. 207.

  • 5. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. OJ C 326 26.10.2012 p. 391–407.

  • 6. D. D. A. D. v. R. D. Ruling of Klaipeda Regional Court 2015 no. 2A-1472-826/2015.

  • 7. Directive 95/46/EC. OJ L 281 23.11.1995 p. 31–50.

  • 8. European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14. 1950 ETS 5 // http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3b04.html.

  • 9. G. K. Order of the Criminal Division of Kaunas Regional Court 2015 no. 1A-582-238/2015.

  • 10. K.A. and A.D. v. Belgium. Nos. 42758/98 and 45558/99 § 83 February 17 2005.

  • 11. Kārtība kādā veicami bezpilota gaisa kuģu un tādu cita veida lidaparātu lidojumi kuri nav kvalificējami kā gaisa kuģi (Regulations on the operation of unmanned aerial vehicles). Official Gazette 2016 no. 231.

  • 12. Köpke v. Germany (dec.). No. 420/07 October 5 2010.

  • 13. Lietuvos Respublikos administracinių nusižengimų kodeksas (Code of Administrative Offences of the Republic of Lithuania). TAR 2015 no. 2015-11216.

  • 14. Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamojo proceso kodeksas (Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania). Official Gazette 2002 no. 37-1341.

  • 15. Lietuvos Respublikos civilinis kodeksas (Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania). Official Gazette 2000 no. 74-2262; 200.

  • 16. Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucija (Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania). Official Gazette 1992 no. 220 33-1014.

  • 17. M.M. v. Russia. No. 7653/06 ECHR 1237.

  • 18. Niemietz v. Germany. December 16 1992 § 29 Series A no. 251-B.

  • 19. Nutarimas ‘Dėl teismų praktikos vagystės ir plėšimo baudžiamosiose bylose’ (Ruling ‘On the Case Law in Criminal Cases on the Theft and Robbery’). Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania 2005 no. 52.

  • 20. Peck v. the United Kingdom. No. 44647/98 § 78 ECHR 2003-I.

  • 21. R. Š. Order of the Criminal Division of Kaunas Regional Court 2016 no. 1A-144-594/2016.

  • 22. Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency. OJ L 79 19.3.2008 p. 1–49.

  • 23. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). OJ L 119 4.5.2016 p. 1–88.

  • 24. Ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania of October 21 199 Case no. 14/98. Official Gazette 1999 no. 90-2662.

  • 25. Ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania of December 29 2004 Case no. 8/02-16/02-25/02-9/03-10/03-11/03-36/03-37/03-06/04-09/04-20/04-26/04-30/04-31/04-32/04-34/04-41/. Official Gazette 2005 no. 1-7.

  • 26. S. Š. V. Š. Ruling of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania 2008 no. 3K-7-2/2008).

  • 27. Sargsyan v. Azerbaijan [GC]. No. 40167/06 § 255 ECHR 2015.

  • 28. Sidabras and Džiautas v. Lithuania. Nos. 55480/00 and 59330/00 § 43 ECHR 2004-VIII.

  • 29. Smirnova v. Russia. Nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99 § 95 ECHR 2003-IX (extracts).

  • 30. The Law Supplementing the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania with the Constitutional ActOn Membership of the Republic of Lithuania in the European Union” and Supplementing Article 150 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania (no. IX-2343) of 13 July 2004. Official Gazette 2004 no. 111-4123.

  • 31. Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. OJ C 326 26.10.2012 p. 47–390.

  • 32. V. A. V. v. L. V. Ruling of the Civil Division of Klaipeda Regional Court 2017 no. 2A-980-730/2017.

  • 33. V. N. Ruling of the Civil Division of Vilnius Regional Court 2017 no. e2A-58-661/2017.

  • 34. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos prie Lietuvos Respublikos vidaus reikalų ministerijos vado įsakymas Nr. 4-544 ‘Dėl Prievartos prieš bepiločius orlaivius panaudojimo tvarkos aprašo patvirtinimo’ (Order of the Chief of State Border Guard Service under the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Lithuania ‘On the Approval of the Description of the Procedure for the Use of Violence against UAS’). TAR 2017 no. 2017-19908.

Suche
Zeitschrifteninformation
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.42

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.138
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.281

Zielgruppe: researchers and scholars in the fields of law and politics, with an acute interest in the cross-pollinations of disciplines, comparative approaches to regional issues, and active dialogue on pressing contemporary issues of theoretical and practical import.
Metrics
Gesamte Zeit Letztes Jahr Letzte 30 Tage
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 425 224 5
PDF Downloads 189 110 3