Martyn's Law turns CCTV placement into a measurable problem
The Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act puts a duty on venues of certain sizes. A spatial twin lets you prove your coverage, not just claim it.
The Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act puts a duty on venues of certain sizes. A spatial twin lets you prove your coverage, not just claim it.
The Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025 — Martyn's Law — places a duty on those responsible for premises and events that meet specified capacity thresholds to take reasonably practicable measures to reduce vulnerability to terrorist attack and the risk of harm to the public. The exact obligations differ between the standard tier and the enhanced tier, but in both cases the test the regulator will apply is whether the measures were planned, recorded and current.
That is a higher bar than the industry is used to. For most venues, CCTV plans, evacuation routes and search points are inherited from previous management, drawn on out-of-date floor plans, and not stress-tested against the current physical reality of the building. Compliance has been a binder of policies. Martyn's Law expects evidence.
Two things determine whether security measures work in practice: coverage and time. CCTV either covers a sightline or it does not. A search point either has the throughput at peak or it does not. A blast standoff distance is either achievable or it is not. All three are spatial problems, and all three are hard to verify from a floor plan.
A photoreal 3D capture of the venue lets a security designer plan CCTV cones of vision against the real obstructions, measure dead zones to the centimetre, and prove coverage by camera, by elevation, by lens. Security planners can route hostile vehicle mitigation around the actual furniture and bollards that exist, not the ones marked on the as-designed plan. Evacuation routes can be walked virtually with timing models that account for stair widths and door swings.
The enhanced tier of Martyn's Law expects documented procedures and a security plan that is regularly reviewed. We see three places a spatial twin is becoming the medium of evidence:
The leverage compounds where the same operator runs many venues — stadia, transport hubs, education estates, retail destinations, government property. The baseline twin of each site supports the local security plan; rolled up, it lets the security director answer the kinds of board-level questions that previously required a regional tour: which sites are below cover specification, which have CCTV at end of life, which would fail a regulator walkthrough today.
The shift is from "we have an SOP for that" to "here is the twin, here is the coverage, here is the gap". Different conversation.
Spatial twins do not replace the security professional; they replace the inherited PDF set. CTSA recommendations, SIA-licensed officer routes, control room SOPs and the physical security policy all sit on top of the twin as a unified record. The capture itself is hardware-light: an iPhone Pro plus the OnXR Capture app for routine venues, our handheld 360° LiDAR + 8K RGB scanner where measurement-grade evidence is required, including in licensed and classified environments.
Operators who get ahead of Martyn's Law will not be the ones with the most policies. They will be the ones whose policies are bound to evidence the regulator can read in a browser.
