The Council of State had to decide urgently on the request to suspend the decree authorizing the use of drones for law enforcement operations. He proved wrong the individual and the association who hoped for good news.
It was an almost impossible mission, but ” some have tried », as the other would say. Only a few days after the publication of the decree authorizing the use of drones equipped with cameras by the police for the security of property and people as well as the prevention of breaches of public order, the Council of State has received a request for suspension of the decree. It was April 24 to be exact. The urgent applications judge of the highest administrative court rejected this request, citing as the main reason that the legal framework is sufficiently protective of the data and privacy of French people.
Guarantees of protection of the citizen today deemed sufficient by the supreme administrative authority
The applicants, an individual and the Association for the Defense of Constitutional Liberties (ADELICO), requested the emergency suspension of the decree of April 19, 2023, contested long before its adoption by various consumer rights organizations such as La Quadrature du Net. These applicants argued before the Council of State that the decree already applied on several occasions by the police authorities ” infringes, in a sufficiently serious and immediate manner, the right to respect for private life, the right to the protection of personal data, the freedom to come and go and the freedom to demonstrate, affecting the applicant as well as the interests defended by the applicant association “.
To justify its refusal to suspend the decree, the Council of State relied on several elements. Among them, we find the decision of the Constitutional Council which, on January 20, 2022, had declared the source law of the decree to be constitutional. The principle is simple: the authorities undertake to use drones only in the event that ” no other way [permet] to achieve the intended purpose “.
For the administrative authority, several guarantees, deemed sufficient, have been provided. Let us quote for example a deployment limited in time and space as well as the limitation of the content and the conservation of the recorded data or the people who will have access to it. Above all, the images captured by drones cannot come from private homes or be coupled to facial recognition devices.
The Council of State promises to decide on the background of the decree in the coming months
The Council of State considers that compliance with these provisions […] must make it possible to ensure the conformity of this recourse (note: to drones) the requirements of the right to respect for private life and the protection of personal data “. Incidentally, the court nevertheless recalled that each prefectural authorization for the use of drones, during demonstrations for example, remains contestable before the administrative judge, including in an urgent manner. Not sure that this is nevertheless enough to console the applicants.
The judge in chambers of the Council of State also recalled that the CNIL, the data policeman, could soon provide new details on the methods of use of monitoring devices. In addition, the authorities that use drones will have to respect the obligation to inform the public of the use of aircraft, as provided for in the famous decree.
For all this, the Council of State considered that the elements invoked by the individual and ADELICO did not allow to raise a serious doubt which would justify the emergency suspension of the decree. The court nevertheless promises to rule on the merits of the legality of the decree within a few months.
21