Watchdog Recommends Making It Compulsory for Police Officers to Activate Body Cameras

On storming the house of Taree man Todd McKenzie after a five-hour standoff, NSW police tactical operations officers went on to shoot the 40-year-old man in the back three times, after they’d already ordered local NSW police officers attending the scene to turn off their body-worn video (BWV), as they were about to enter the property with their own BWV cameras turned off.

The subsequent NSW coronial inquiry into the death of a man, who was known by local NSW police to suffer mental health issues, saw NSW deputy state coroner Harriet Grahame recommend that NSW tactical police be required to be equipped with body-worn cameras.

In response to the shooting and other incidents involving questionable usage of BWV, the state’s only police watchdog, the Law Enforcement Conduct Commission (LECC), has just released its report relating to its Review of NSW Police Force body-worn video policy and practice, which takes the inquest recommendation a step further and suggests that all officers be required to turn BWV on.

In introducing its report findings, the LECC set out that whilst it was carrying out its inquiry, the NSW Police Force had been enhancing its BWV capability in two ways. Firstly, its implementing new BWV that turns on automatically when a police firearm or taser is drawn, and the other development, is the force is currently producing new BWV standard operating procedures (SOPs).

As LECC chief commissioner Peter Johnson SC set out in a video accompanying the last week release of the new report, the police watchdog is making one broad recommendation in respect of BWV, and that is that “the police force simplify its current policy to the clear instruction that officers must activate body worn cameras, at a minimum, when exercising police powers”.

Current NSW Police BWV use

The review was sparked by a number of incidents where NSW police use of BWV has been problematic, which has included scenarios where officers have deactivated BWV partway through an incident, instances where officers have allegedly breached protocol but have had their BWV turned off, along with the nonactivation of BWV as it hadn’t been required when exercising police powers.

The LECC report notes that the use of BWV in NSW is governed by the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 (NSW), with the benefits that it provides including the provision of accurate evidence for prosecutions, a tool for compliant handling, increasing officer confidence, reducing need for witness testimony, identifying training gaps, serving as a review tool and increasing officer accountability.

As NSW police commissioner Karen Webb has explained, the “mandatory wearing and early activation, where practicable, will protect the overriding integrity of operational policing activity. Results already show significant outcomes of protection for operational police officers and the delivery of exceptional evidence to judicial officers in courts throughout NSW”.

Statewide rollout of BWV occurred in November 2016, after a pilot program was run the year prior, while in March 2024, around 4,500 BWV cameras were operational in this state. And the force is currently looking at introducing ‘integrated connected officer’ technology, which will enhance the positive benefits associated with the devices.

Right now, however, there is a shortage of BWV amongst the NSW Police Force, and there is also an issue with its ability to store more BWV footage.

Current BWV SOPs make it mandatory for all officers equipped with BWV to wear them when practicable. However, when particular situations are listed for BWV use, officers are not required to switch on their BWV, but rather they’re told they ‘should’ use it.

The situations when BWV should be used include, when writing information in a notebook, to capture evidence, when exercising a police power, in being a first responder to an incident, when inspecting licensed premises, when policing antisocial incidents, during vehicle stops, in conversing with people, when use of force is anticipated, for taser use and when conducting strip searches.

Watchdog reforms to BWV use

Along with changing SOPs so that BWV must be turned on by officers in the field, the LECC report makes a number of other recommendations, which include recording the reason for nonactivation of BWV or when deactivating them prematurely, and “mandate that, at a minimum, officers must activate BWV when using statutory powers”.

Further the report recommends that BWV SOPs contain definitions for terms such as ‘must’, that use is mandated at Priority 1 and 2 incidents, as well as critical incidents, ensure that domestic violence SOPs contain the same stipulations for BWV use, mandate use by tactical officers, review other SOPs so that when officers undertake the forced entry of a premises BWV are used.

The report also suggests that SOPs are updated so that highway police use BWV, especially during police pursuits, that NSW police explain to the LECC how it will make sure that highway and traffic police do apply BWV use, that BWV SOPs are available on the NSW police website, that NSW police publishes updates about BWV use and that BWV footage is available when resolving complaints.

Required BWV use a no-brainer

In response to the release of the report, the Redfern Legal Centre has remarked that it has dealt with numerous incidents over the years, via its Police Accountability Practice, that would have benefited by the addition of BWV use, as it would have clarified whether questionable police conduct was appropriate, along with confirming facts on the ground.

RLC is calling upon the NSW state government to enact all the recommendations of the LECC report and ensure that NSW police officers activate the BWV that they’ve been equipped with whilst in the field, while NSW police should address the deficiencies of its current equipment. And the legal centre added that those complaining about police ought to be able to access related BWV footage.

“The use of BWV is so sporadic and random that its effectiveness as a tool for evidence gathering and police accountability is greatly diminished,” said Samantha Lee, RLC police accountability supervising solicitor.

“Bystanders are often forced to film encounters with NSW police with their own phones, because we cannot rely on the police to record the interaction.”