Regulating drones in Malaysia – are you flying illegally?
UNMANNED aircraft systems or popularly known as drones were originally used exclusively by the military but are now being developed for educational, recreational and commercial purposes. The positive impact of drone use includes transporting essential requirements to hard-to-reach areas and even in rescue operations. However, more and more, the conduct of some drone operators has caused drone-use to be perceived negatively. An excellent example of this was in 2018 when drone sightings close to the restricted Gatwick Airport airspace resulted in the cancellation of hundreds of flights. Existing laws already regulate this taking into account that such activity is dangerous as drones can be sucked into aircraft engines and cause them to shut down.
In Malaysia, the operation of drones is regulated under sections 140 to 144 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 2016 (“Regulations”) and falls under the authority of the Civil Aviation Authority of Malaysia (CAAM). The Regulations classify drones into three different categories: (a) small unmanned aircraft systems; (b) small unmanned surveillance aircraft; and (c) unmanned aircraft systems of more than 20kg.
Small drones without any surveillance equipment which fall under the small unmanned aircraft systems category that are safely flown and maintain direct and unaided visual contact can be operated without authorisation if not flying (i) in Class A, B, C or G airspace; (ii) within an aerodrome traffic zone; and (iii) at the height of not more than 400ft above the surface of the earth.
In reality, most drones come with surveillance equipment and consequently fall under the small unmanned surveillance aircraft category. The use of such drones does not require authorisation if, amongst others, they are not flying (i) over and within 150m of any area which is used for residential, commercial, industrial or recreational purposes; (ii) in open air over any assembly of more than 1,000 persons; (iii) within 50m of any person and any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the control of the operator; and (iv) within 30m of any person whilst the drone is taking off or landing. However, where the drone weighs more than 20kg (without fuel) authorisation from the CAAM is required before use.
Could the Gatwick incident happen in Malaysia and what would the impact be using existing Malaysian laws?
Where drone operators use drones without CAAM authorisation or where there has been a failure to comply with the requirements set out in the CAAM authorisation, the operators would be in breach of Malaysian law for flying drones within restricted areas, regardless of the type of drones being operated. The penalty imposed on such operators upon conviction could be a fine not exceeding RM50,000 for individuals, or RM100,000 for body corporates. Individual operators also risk being imprisoned for a term not exceeding three years, or the penalty of both a fine and imprisonment.
However, in reality, current regulations may not be sufficient to combat drone intrusions and operators may fly drones illegally as the current laws do not provide adequate preventive measures to compel compliance with existing regulations.
Can drone intrusions be prevented?
In the wake of drone-related intrusions, different countries have proposed or implemented various measures to deal with this.
For example, in September 2019, climate activists failed in their attempt to fly drones within Heathrow Airport’s restricted area because airport authorities installed preventative measures in the form of jamming devices to block drone signals thereby stopping the drones from taking off. In the US, to enhance safety and security, the Federal Aviation Administration of the US proposed that most drones incorporate technology to enable identification and location within US airspace. Another measure to prevent drone intrusion is geofencing which uses technology to create a virtual geographic boundary resulting in drones being disabled from flying outside such predefined boundaries.
The Malaysian government may also explore other measures, including empowering authorities to land, seize and search rogue drones, and for operators to obtain drone pilot licences.
In summary, it is suggested that while there are not many reported drone intrusion incidents in Malaysia, the government could put in place measures such as compulsory installation of tracking devices or geofencing to ensure the safety and security of the country is not jeopardised.