Videosorveglianza, privacy e pubblica utilità negli unmanned vehicles. Autorità indipendenti, autorità giudiziarie e self-regulation

Autonomation constitutes one of the main challenges in the contemporary era, because technological development touches upon multiple sectors: health, mobility, employment, banking, etc. In this respect, the concept of “remote” or, better, “unmanned” has become even more fashionable. Indeed, it is well-known that the impacts of IT development in urban mobility, with drones and self-driving vehicles, represent the very near future. Furthermore, the medical sector is affected by the notion of “remoteness”: some medical treatment may be delivered through “robo-surgery” techniques. Based on such a background, the research question of this Ph.D. thesis is to investigate how unmanned vehicles may prejudice the privacy of each individual whilst representing a suitable tool to enhance public security. In other words, there is a tension between two different poles. On one hand there is the duty of each State to guarantee public order, while on the other hand it is vital that public safety does not compromise the citizens’ right of privacy. Thus, the balancing act between these two poles becomes crucial. Once the main research question has been clarified, the methodology adopted in this research work is explained. From a descriptive perspective, this thesis is based on three main pillars, entitled “parts”, plus the introduction – at the beginning – and the conclusion – at the end. The “introduction” pursues the task of clarifying the subject of the research; the methodology adopted and the objective of the research. As far as the methodology is concerned, the latter is, fundamentally, based on a comparative analysis involving the Italian legal system, the European one, and common law (British, Scottish, US and Australian). Yet, this comparative analysis does not become, merely, a proposal of “transplantation”; rather it unfolds as a “research instrument” to understand how the law has been shaped by societies. To better explain, the underlying idea is that Law reflects values existing in a specific society and in a specific historic moment. The introduction of this work closes with a paragraph in which both the weakness and the strongest elements are discussed. The ratio is to elucidate that the topic is, fundamentally, interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and cross-disciplinary. The first pillar of this research thesis – called “part one” - achieves the purpose of discussing the “drones world” from a purely linguistic and terminological perspective. The findings of this first part are instrumental in shaping the notion of a “drones’ taxonomy”. The latter represents a new construct: “drones” may deal with, and be applicable to, different sectors such as transportation, industries, public services. In this respect, it is also stressed in this first part that “drones” were already employed, extensively, to manage the Covid-19 health emergency, thanks to their multiple use. The second pillar – called “part two” – is where burning issues are discussed and interpreted: among these, the way unmanned vehicles may affect the right to privacy. The innovative element of this analysis, which is also the nitty-gritty of the thesis, is represented by the concept of the right of personal outdoor space. This alludes to the fact that every citizen is entitled to reclaim a right to be let alone even in a public space, i.e., streets, gardens, etc. This element is reminiscent of the “balancing activity” to strike between these two opposite sides of the same coin: privacy and video-surveillance. The third pillar – entitled “part three” – is focused on unmanned vehicle regulations. In this respect the comparative analysis crops up in the thesis. More in depth, the discussion is concerned with the Joint Reports of the Law Commissions (automated vehicles and aviation autonomy), to the European Union projects (e.g., smart roads and drone strategy 2.0.), and to the Australian report relating to privacy in drone use. Moreover, unmanned vehicles are scrutinised also though the lens of some recent US rulings and controversies relating to driverless car incidents. Within the third part, a further research question is dealt with, i.e., who should regulate in the matter of unmanned vehicles. In order to provide an answer, an empirical case study shall be introduced. The latter is the city of Edinburgh, thus the Scottish (common) law. The “Edinburgh case” represents the key to demonstrating that unmanned vehicles constitute an interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary topic, straddling privacy and urban infrastructures. In this respect, the thesis hints at the new notion of “drones’ motorway” or, better “aerial drone-street” concept. Also, a new, potential, judicial paradigm is recommended to manage the controversy linked with incidents and/or accidents involving unmanned vehicles. This fits with the concept of “drone restoration” shaped on restorative justice practice. Ultimately, the conclusions therein reassess and cogitate on the entire research work of the thesis, according to a dialectical approach. In the latter, continuity between the introduction and the conclusions via the three parts of the thesis is eventually pursued and hopefully accomplished. In a nutshell, the synopsis of the entire research thesis emphasises that a human centric regulation is required to be followed by the Regulator(s), for any future legislative development in this area.