'The Challenges of Autonomous Motor Vehicles for Queensland Road and Criminal Laws' by Kieran Tranter in (2016) 16(2)
QUT Law Review 59-81 comments
This article examines the challenges of autonomous motor vehicles for Queensland road and
criminal laws.
Autonomous vehicles refer to
motor vehicles where driver decision making has
been augmented or replaced by intelligent systems. Proponents of autonomous vehicles argue
that they will virtually eliminate road accidents, boost productivity and provide significant
environmental benefits. The key issue is that
autonomous vehicles challenge the notion of
human responsibility which lies at the core of
Queensland’s road and criminal laws. The road
rules are predicated on a driver in control of
the vehicle, the intoxication regime is concerned
with the person in charge of the vehicle and
the dangerous driving offences require a person
who operates a vehicle. Notwithstanding this challenge, it can be seen that much of
Queensland’s law is adaptable to autonomous vehicles. However, there are some identifiable
anomalies that require reform.
Tranter suggests that
The challenge of autonomous
vehicles is that by replacing or augmenting driver decision
making, existing laws that assume driver responsibility seem inadequate. Nevertheless, it is
argued that much of Queensland’s road and
criminal laws are adaptable to autonomous
vehicles. However, there are some clear anomalies that will need to be addressed to effectively
maximise the safety, economic and environmental benefits of autonomous vehicles.
Furthermore, there will be the need for more detailed reforms as autonomous vehicles become
more widespread.
This argument is in three sections.
The first
section locates autonomous vehicles within a
trajectory of innovation that has
steadily reduced driver involvement with primary vehicle
controls. The technical details
of emerging autonomous vehicles
will be canvassed and the
safety, economic and environmental drivers
for adoption will be outlined. This section
concludes by identifying different ‘levels’ of automation for
autonomous vehicles which forms
the basis for the second section. This section
also argues why a focus on Queensland law is
appropriate and desirable.
The second section audits the challenges of the
different levels of automation for Queensland’s
road and criminal laws.
The focus is on the substantive provisions of the rules of the road, the
rules regarding intoxication and vehicles and specific offences under the
Criminal Code 1899 (Qld)
(the ‘Code’). The concern is that as automation increases it
becomes less certain that the
human occupant is the person in control of the vehicle for the road rules, in charge of the vehicle
for the intoxication regime and the person who
operates the vehicle for the dangerous driving
offences. Nevertheless, it will be shown that
much of the existing law is adaptable to
autonomous vehicles.
The third section examines how to reform Queensland road and criminal laws to address the
identified anomalies. Reform in relation to
autonomous vehicles is
underway in several
overseas jurisdictions. In particular some of the immediate concerns with the interaction of
increasingly autonomous vehicles and the road rules that were identified could be addressed in
Queensland by the adoption of the definitions of
autonomous vehicle and driver to include an
operator of an autonomous vehicle that have been
enacted in some United States jurisdictions.
