Drones in the hands of criminals: police demand control and prepare law for the drone market
Drones, which have become one of the most visible tools on the battlefield during the years of full-scale war, are gradually going beyond military use and creating new challenges for internal security. Equipment capable of unobtrusively conducting surveillance, transporting objects and performing tasks at a distance can be useful for the army, rescuers, farmers or engineers, but in the criminal environment such capabilities turn into a dangerous resource. Due to the first recorded cases of the use of drones in serious crimes, the National Police insist on a law that should establish clear rules for the use of drones, accounting for their owners, operators and actual users.
The Head of the National Police of Ukraine, Ivan Vyhivskyi, announced during a conference in Kyiv that at the end of 2025, law enforcement officers recorded the first cases of the use of drones in particularly serious crimes. Among the examples, he cited episodes related to an attempted murder in the Lviv region and the preparation of a terrorist attack in the Dnipropetrovsk region.
Such cases have shown that drones can be used in criminal plans as a tool for remote action. For criminal groups, this means the ability to reduce the risk of personal presence near the crime scene, and for the police, a more complicated process of identifying those involved, since it is necessary to find out the origin of the device, its route of movement, the circle of users and technical traces of control.
A drone in the hands of criminals is dangerous because it combines mobility, accessibility and the ability to work remotely. Such a device can be used to monitor a person or object, inspect the territory, deliver items or prepare further actions without the perpetrator’s direct contact with the scene.
This creates additional difficulties for traditional investigation methods. If previously law enforcement officers could search for witnesses, surveillance cameras, traces of a person’s presence or transport, then in the case of a drone, a significant part of the actions is transferred to airspace. Because of this, the investigation needs data on the owner of the equipment, the operator, possible launch points, control channels and technical characteristics of the device.
Without such information, the investigation may lose time, especially if the device was used briefly, over a considerable distance or passed from one person to another several times. Because of this, the National Police believes that Ukraine should have a system that will allow for the rapid identification of those who own drones and actually control them.
To respond to new risks, a draft law has already been prepared that should regulate the circulation of drones in Ukraine. The document provides for the creation of a more transparent control system, within which data on drone owners, operators and people who actually use such devices will be recorded.
The goal of the initiative is to enable the police to more quickly verify the origin of a drone and establish those responsible in the event of its use in a crime. The likelihood of criminal use of technology increases if the device is freely transferred between people without registration, and its actual user remains unknown to state authorities.
According to Vyhivskyi, the bill already has the support of some MPs. The National Police expects that the parliament will continue working on the document, since without a legislative framework, law enforcement officers are forced to respond to a new threat with tools that were created for other conditions.
The head of the National Police paid special attention to people who gained experience working with drones during the war. A significant part of military and volunteer specialists learned to operate drones, configure them, work with intelligence, navigate the terrain, and perform complex technical tasks.
After returning to civilian life, such skills can be useful for the legal market: in the field of security, agricultural monitoring, logistics, cartography, construction, or emergency services. At the same time, Vyhivskyi warned that people without work, support, and proper adaptation may become vulnerable to the offers of the criminal environment, which is interested in specialists with practical experience in operating drones.
This risk does not concern the accusation of the military, but the need to create conditions under which their knowledge will be applied in civilian professions. In the absence of such opportunities, criminal groups may try to exploit the shortage of technical specialists for their own interests.
The spread of drones has changed the nature of potential threats, as a relatively small device can perform tasks that previously required people, transport and more complex training. In peaceful life, drones have long been used for filming, monitoring fields, inspecting infrastructure and search operations, but criminal episodes have shown that such technology requires clear rules.
The National Police is proposing not to ban the technology, but to control its circulation and use. It is important for law enforcement officers to be able to quickly establish who owns the device, who operated it and under what circumstances it was used. In cases of attempted murder or preparation of a terrorist attack, such information can be crucial for a quick response and prevention of new crimes.
The issue of drones in Ukraine has already gone beyond the frontline topic, as drones have become part of a broader technological environment. After the first serious criminal episodes, the police are trying to achieve rules that will allow them to track the circulation of the equipment, reduce the risk of its use in crimes, and preserve the legal use of drones where they are truly needed.
