Back to the database
Record STMT-WDD955ELegally binding

Acceptable use of Generative AI

Institutional policy State lawOceania · NZin force

This policy establishes the rules and standards for the acceptable use of generative artificial intelligence (genAI) by New Zealand Police staff and contractors. It mandates mandatory training, formal tool review and approval processes, human-in-the-loop accountability, and specific labeling of genAI outputs. Furthermore, it restricts automated decision-making and prohibits the use of genAI outputs in court contexts without prior judicial approval.

Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.

Who issued it

New Zealand PoliceGovernment
Lead issuer
Legal forceLegally binding
Under whose authorityState law
Judged fromfull text

Who it governs

Public sector bodiesWorkers

New Zealand Police staff, contractors, and vendors who develop or supply technologies for policing operations.

Sectors
Justice · policing

What the document contains

What's covered

The policy covers internal staff and contractor rules for utilizing approved generative AI tools, mandatory training requirements, procurement and vendor obligations, audit log requirements, and mandatory labeling for AI-generated text or media.

What's missing

Technical documentation on underlying model architectures or specific algorithmic weights are not mentioned.

Key takeaways
  • All staff must complete acceptable use of genAI training before operating any generative AI tools.
  • Every genAI tool must undergo ICT review and be approved by the Security and Privacy Reference Group before deployment.
  • Fully automated use of genAI tools without a human-in-the-loop is strictly prohibited.
  • GenAI outputs are currently not permitted for use in any court context without prior judicial approval.
  • All genAI systems used by Police must include audit logs, and tools undergo a rolling review every six months.
Principles it states
Lawful, ethical, proportionate, and safe in a New Zealand policing context
Outline
· Executive Summary
· Policy statement and principles
· Authority for urgent use
· Use of AI transcription and translation tools
· Use of Generative AI tools by vendors
· Governance, audit and rolling review
· Additional Information
· Appendix A: Suggested Generative AI Labels
· Appendix B: Principles and Risk Matrix for genAI tools
Issued1 September 2025
Length3,938 words
FormatNot recorded
Scopenational

How it scores

Pending review

Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.

Accountability

4/5

Clear responsibility for AI outcomes

The user remains fully responsible and accountable for the outcomes and consequences that result from the use of a genAI tool, including for any Code of Conduct breaches.

Who

screening score · 2026-10-23

Fairness

4/5

Non-discrimination and equitable treatment

Generative AI transcription and translation tools should be specifically assessed for their accuracy with Māori and Pacific languages before being utilised on audio primarily in these languages.

Use of AI transcription and translation tools

screening score · 2026-10-23

Human Dignity

1/5

Respect for the inherent worth of persons

This policy ensures that appropriate safeguards are in place for Police’s use of genAI, and that use of genAI is lawful, ethical, proportionate, and safe in a New Zealand policing context.

Overview

screening score · 2026-10-23

Human Oversight

4/5

Humans remain in control of consequential decisions

New Zealand Police does not currently permit the use of genAI in fully automated contexts (i.e. without a human-in-the-loop).

Who

screening score · 2026-10-23

Privacy

4/5

Protection of personal data and private life

privacy and the use of personal and/or sensitive information

Who

screening score · 2026-10-23

Transparency

4/5

Openness about how AI systems work and are used

When using a genAI tool, Police staff should label the outputs as being AI generated, referencing the name of the tool, unless there is a clear operational reason to withhold this information.

Who

screening score · 2026-10-23

Enforcement

4/5

Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force

If there are concerns that a user has used genAI beyond the approval scope, this may be considered a disciplinary matter or referred to the Integrity and Conduct group

Audit

screening score · 2026-10-23

Impact Assessment

4/5

Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use

These aspects will be considered at the time that a Policy Risk Assessment is developed when evaluating the introduction of new genAI tools.

How and When

screening score · 2026-10-23

Topics

artificial_intelligence law_enforcement police_policy generative_ai accountability