Who or what is a driver? In the coming world of autonomous, automated, or remotely operated vehicles that will be a critical legal question.
As the world begins to adopt new transport solutions – from driverless cars, trucks, and pilotless drones to remotely operated systems in industrial settings – the Law Commission has been asked specifically to look at the rules that support remote (rather than autonomous) driving on public roads.
A 93-page paper has kickstarted a government-led consultation on humans operating vehicles remotely. A Law Commission workshop on the topic will take place on 28 July, with the consultation due to wrap up by 2 September.
So, what are the main issues?
Remote driving is distinct from the general-transport idea of driverless vehicles. There are three key reasons why a human driver might be outside a vehicle rather than in it, explains the paper:
• Hazardous surroundings. Remote driving is most advanced in off-road settings, such as mines or deep quarries, where the driver works at a distance from heavy vehicles, primarily for his or her safety.
• To overcome logistical difficulties in moving a driver from one vehicle to another. There is, for example, “considerable interest in using remote drivers to deliver rental cars”, claims the paper. A single driver might have oversight of a fleet of vehicles at different times.
• As an adjunct to automated vehicles where there is no driver’s seat onboard. For example, a remote driver might be employed in an emergency to hit the brakes or avoid a collision.
However, there are grey areas that need clarification, says the Law Commission, such as when autonomous or automated vehicles are remotely supervised. The Commission tentatively suggests that a remote assistant would not be designated as a driver in law, if they did not exercise direct lateral or longitudinal control over the vehicle.
Similar legal complexities – not covered by this consultation – may face drone operators in the future, where a single pilot or remote assistant might oversee fleets of largely autonomous or automated drones.
In the US, the legal definition of a driver was recently expanded to include autonomous software or hardware.
Under current UK road traffic law, there is (surprisingly) no express legal requirement for a driver to be inside the vehicle. Nor are there any provisions which completely prevent remote driving.
However, detailed clauses about a driver’s responsibilities, set out in various Acts, could cause problems for remote operation, because they tend to assume the driver is onboard. These are among the challenges the consultation seeks to overcome; the law needs clarifying.
There are also big safety challenges in remote driving. These include: the need for reliable connectivity – and what to do when it is lost; whether a remote driver can have full situational awareness of a vehicle and its location; keeping remote drivers alert for long periods; and the cybersecurity of connected vehicles. Could a hacker seize control?
Other thorny issues concern drivers’ licenses: would a remote assistant need one? And would someone from overseas driving remotely in the UK need a British licence? Indeed, should someone in another country be allowed to drive remotely on UK roads at all?
Failure to resolve these legal uncertainties could have “a chilling effect” that deters worthwhile projects and innovations, says the paper. They could also allow unsafe systems – and operators – onto our roads.
