ELOM:2023:024 | Danger posed by uncontrolled drone flying | North Holland
Decision: 24 September 2023 PPS North Holland
Aviation case category: Unmanned aviation
Formal links: -/-
Content indication: Uncontrolled and low drone flying over football supporters. Settlement proposal for endangerment accepted.
PPS Decision
in the case against a drone operator, referred to below as the suspect.
Reason for the investigation
The investigation was launched following findings by the regional police.
Suspected offence
Violation of Article 5.3 of the Aviation Act (participating in air traffic in such a way that it causes or may cause danger to persons or property).
Facts and circumstances
Based on the official report, the PPS judged that it can be established that on [date in year] 2022, in the run-up to a football match, the suspect flew a drone in an uncontrolled manner over a crowd of people. A police officer stated that the drone flew quickly from left to right, varying considerably in altitude. Based partly on the height of the buildings, it was estimated that the drone flew at an average height of 10 metres above people.
The suspect stated to the police at the scene that he operated the drone above the crowd. He further stated he had no flying licence.
Evidence considerations
The report issued by the police is summary. It is understandable that in the heat of the moment, not all relevant questions were asked. Less understandable is the lack of a clear description of the drone, which was seized and subsequently returned to the suspect. Since it was not known how heavy the drone was, it cannot be determined whether the suspect was required to have a flying licence to operate the drone. At the request of the PPS, an additional hearing of the suspect was attempted, but without success. This left unknown, for example, whether the suspect was (also) the operator of the drone. The PPS is of the opinion that this can be left aside given concrete danger that was posed. It follows from the police findings that the suspect participated in air traffic as the drone's operator in such a way that it caused or could have caused danger to persons.
Decision
The PPS issued the suspect with a €500 settlement proposal for violation of Article 5.3 of the Aviation Act. The suspect accepted this proposal.