Reform of police body-worn camera laws flagged

The Victorian Attorney-General is set to reform laws that regulate body-worn cameras following a contentious decision in the County Court that stops police officers from being compelled to release footage in civil trials.

The court ruling in September last year has the potential to deny crucial evidence from being tendered during civil proceedings that could prove an abuse of power by police, but could also exonerate an officer against such an allegation.

A body-worn camera on a police officer.Credit:Joe Armao

Attorney-General Jaclyn Symes confirmed that key stakeholders had already been consulted about a potential amendment to the laws.

“Body-worn cameras play an important role in law enforcement, assisting in evidence gathering for prosecutions, disciplinary matters and officer training,” Ms Symes told The Age.

“While the footage is often sensitive and requires adequate protection, it is important that relevant evidence is available in appropriate circumstances.”

Lawyers and civil libertarians have urged Ms Symes to overhaul the Surveillance Devices Act 1999 and Regulations, which prescribe specific purposes for which body-worn camera footage may be used, such as in criminal investigations, prosecutions and investigations of complaints against officers.

A Victoria Police spokesperson said the police force was working with Department of Justice and Community Safety on the matter.

The cameras were first trialled in Victoria in 2017 in response to recommendations by the Royal Commission into Family Violence, and are now worn by about 8000 frontline police and protective services officers along with some prison guards and Ambulance Victoria paramedics.

The County Court decision from last year also has implications for other civil cases, including Transport Accident Commission claims, where a law enforcement officer or paramedic was present and equipped with a camera.

Robinson Gill lawyer Jeremy King warned of a serious miscarriage of justice if the Victorian government failed to act.

“Almost on a daily basis, a client will tell me that their interaction with police has been filmed because they see the blinking red light. Yet right now, nobody outside of Victoria Police, including a judge, is ever going to see the footage unless the person is charged.

“It is in the interests of everyone in the community that we unlock this footage so it can be used in the way it was intended,” Mr King said.

The County Court case was brought by a former prisoner who claimed he was bashed by prison guards in the Melbourne Remand Centre in 2015.

Two of the guards were wearing body-worn cameras, but lawyers for the Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office opposed the release of the footage to the plaintiff.

In the ruling, Judge Sandra Davis said the law prevented the use of the footage in the case.

“I acknowledge the difficulties which this prohibition may cause for plaintiffs in civil proceedings,” Judge Davis said.

Access to the footage, and the way cameras are used in Victoria, have been under scrutiny since they were rolled out.

Police are able to use their discretion to turn the cameras off, which officers say helps during sensitive inquiries, but it’s a power human rights and criminal defence lawyers say could be easily abused.

The availability of the footage to the public is also restricted. Someone making a complaint against an officer can ask to view the footage at their local police station, but police can prevent access if it could put someone in danger or compromise an investigation.

A still frame from the Metropolitan Police Department body-worn camera footage during the US Capital riots in January.Credit:Metropolitan Police Department/AP

Police forces in the United Kingdom and United States have grappled with similar issues.

The Los Angeles Police Department at first prevented the public release of footage, before becoming one of the few police forces to release footage of critical incidents including police shootings.

But advocates and lawyers there still say access to footage is difficult, according to a report in The Guardian.

The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.

Senior Crime Reporter

Tammy Mills is the legal affairs reporter for The Age.

Share this post