Despite the recurring debate on the mandatory use of body cameras by security forces, Brazil remains without a federal regulation. The regulatory vacuum keeps the tool subject to different rules in states, corporations, and courts, but not for lack of attempts.
In the National Congress, the Commission on Public Security and Combating Organized Crime (CSPCCO) of the Chamber of Deputies examined, between 2023 and 2026, over 2,000 proposals on security, including requests, projects, etc.
A survey byAgência Públicafound that only five bills or decrees that deal with "body cameras" have been voted on in four years of legislature.
Among the five projects that address the topic and passed through CSPCCO, three had faster processing: two that restrict access to images from body cameras used by police forcesThere is a third proposal that foresees the use of this resource not by police officers, but by inmates in progressions of sentence that would allow them to leave prisons. At the other end of priorities, two projects proposing regulation of camera use to facilitate investigations have already been rejected.
From the streets to presentations in court
On July 30th of this year, the Jury Court of Barra Funda, in São Paulo, acquitted two military police officers accused of killing Igor Oliveira Santos, 24, during an operation in Paraisópolis in 2025.A week after the trial, unprecedented segments of the images from the body cameras of the agents were released and contradicted part of the testimonies given by the PMs.
The images show Igor and three other men surrendering and obeying the officers' orders to lie down on the ground. Igor was asked if he was armed, answered that he was not, and when he began to obey the order to stand up, he was hit by a first shot fired by one of the PMs, followed by another from a second officer.
According to the security agents' version, Igor was armed and posed a risk. The body camera images, released byTV Globo, however, do not show any resistance. The broadcaster also reported that the officers were unaware that the body cameras were activated, as they were turned on automatically via Bluetooth. No weapon was seized during the operation.
Even if the case in Paraisópolis were reopened, the new images would not be admissible as evidence, should the bill (PL)2.339/24If approved by Congress, the project will prevent records made by bodycams from being admitted by the judiciary in criminal cases, even if they show flagrant abuse of authority.
"It is prohibited for judicial and police authorities to use any image generated by police officers' body cameras for criminal proceedings against the officers who were wearing the equipment, regardless of the context or content of the recordings," states the project. The proposal awaits the designation of a rapporteur in the Constitution, Justice and Citizenship Commission (CCJ).According to senior researcher at the Violence Studies Center of the University of São Paulo (USP) Ariadne Natal, considering body cameras as "instruments of accusation" against police officers is a "misconceived premise." She states, "the image produced is not evidence against anyone," but rather "a record of what happened."
The use of the camera is a protection for both the population and the police officers themselves," Natal asserts in an interview with Agência Pública. She highlights that, in addition to clarifying discrepancies regarding approaches and the use of force, the resource can help deter abuses. "Whether by the police officer or by the citizen. The fact that the action is being filmed makes actors in the dynamic behave differently. This reduces the use of physical violence, verbal violence, and hostility.
"The use of the camera is a protection for both the population and the police officers themselves," Natal confirms."If approved, this project will significantly impact the way police conduct themselves," she adds."It will also change the way citizens interact with the police," Natal concludes.
The case of Paraisópolis is not isolated. On June 13th, also in São Paulo, Jefferson de Souza, 24, was killed by military police with three shots from an assault rifle during an approach. Body cameras of the involved agents recorded the moment the homeless young man cries and is subdued before being assassinated.
In their testimony, police officers initially stated that Jefferson allegedly reacted to the approach and tried to take a soldier's weapon. The analysis of the imagesBy the PM's own Internal Affairs DepartmentIt concluded that he was unarmed, surrendering, and not posing a threat when he was shot. At that time, one of the officers used his hand to cover the body camera lens seconds before the shots were fired.
In May 2024On June 15th, the Ministry of Justice publishedGuidelines for the use of body camerasBy public security agencies in the country. The guidelines concern the use of the equipment and the circumstances in which they must remain mandatory.The following day, four projects to suspend the effects of the decree were submitted to the National Congress.
Two of them are authored by Alberto Fraga (PL-DF), a retired colonel of the Federal District Military Police (PMDF) who, at the time, chaired the Cspcco. For the legislator, "rules should not be defined through decrees, but rather by means of legislation."federal lawThe proposal was approved. The text still awaits analysis in other committees before going to the plenary session.
Bill for rapid image sharing for researchers is rejected
Authored by Deputy Pastor Henrique Vieira (PSol-RJ), thePL 4.844/25was protocolled on September 30, 2025, aiming to expedite the transmission of audio-visual records, logs, and metadata from body cameras to the judicial police and Public Ministry. The bill stipulates that, upon request, images shall be made available within 72 hours of any incident. In just six months, the proposal was rejected by the security commission.
In the bill's justification, the deputy cited the case of Victoria Manoelly dos Santos, 16, killed by a military police officer in East São Paulo. "Justice had to wait four months for access to the body camera footage, despite the Tarcísio government claiming the legal deadline is 20 days after a request. Even the Civil Police has expressed discomfort with successive denials of immediate access to records," the parliamentarian reported.
The argument for rejecting the proposal was that "the legal framework already has sufficient tools for evidence requests and access to records necessary for criminal investigations."
ToThe Public, Vieira stated that the proposal aimed to ensure images are preserved "properly and efficiently for use in investigations." "The issue is that the Public Security Commission, in its majority, is against even using body cameras on police uniforms. [...] Good police officers certainly don't see any problem with it. Many, in fact, advocate for it," he said.
A third attempt to regulate body cameras in Congress is the PL3295/24.Presented by Deputies Erika Kokay (PT-DF) and Tadeu Veneri (PT-PR) in August 2024, the proposal is comprehensive, sets guidelines, and mandates the mandatory use of body cameras by members of federal, state, district, and municipal security forces.
In the Public Safety Commission, the project's rapporteur, Deputy Paulo Bilynskyj (PL/SP), presented a contrary opinion to the approval of the text arguing that "the use of body cameras has already been determined by the Executive Branch through Administrative Order 648/2024/MJSP, as well as by the Supreme Federal Court."
"Therefore, given the high cost of its implementation, this practice has been gradually adopted by the federated entities," the parliamentarian stated in his report. Bilynskyj was one of the deputies who voted in favor of PDL 294/24, which seeks to overturn the Ministry of Justice's administrative order guiding the use of body cameras by police - the same order he uses to oppose a law regulating the matter.PublicaHe contacted Bilynskyj's press office but did not receive a response. In case of a statement, this space will be updated.
Despite the text of PL 3295/24 being rejected in September 2025, the bill was sent, almost a year ago, to the Finance and Taxation Commission (CFT), where it awaits the designation of a rapporteur. "We will try to reverse in the next commissions," said parliamentarian Tadeu Veneri. After review in all commissions designated by the Chamber of Deputies presidency, a bill typically goes for analysis by the Chamber of Deputies' Constitution and Justice Commission (CCJ), a fundamental step before it can be voted on.
According to Ludmila Ribeiro, a political science professor at the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), part of the resistance to approving the bills is related to the weight of corporatism among parliamentarians linked to security forces."Congresspeople who are also police officers are situated within this logic of corporatism: 'let's avoid this bill being approved because, that way, we protect ourselves'," she says.
"The fact is that in this protection [against bodycams], we are even failing to show society what a good police officer does and how deviations tend to be smaller than most of the public believes," she concluded.
Political resistance and lack of transparency
AsurveyA study by the Violence Studies Core (NEV-USP) mapped the implementation of body cameras in 26 states and the Federal District, based on requests under the Freedom of Information Act (LAI), official gazettes, and information published by the press. According to the data,by 2025, 20 Brazilian states had adopted the equipment or were conducting feasibility studies.
Despite the expansion, the research points out that the use of body cameras by security forces still faces obstacles such as a lack of national standardization, political resistance, and low levels of public transparency.
One of the cases cited is that of Santa Catarina, the first state in the country to implement a body camera policy, in 2019. The program was fully closed in September 2024, during the government of Jorginho Mello (PL), under the justification of equipment obsolescence.
There is also resistance to implementing cameras in two other states led by the right: Goiás, governed by Daniel Vilela (MDB), and Mato Grosso, led by Otaviano Pivetta (Republicanos). Both states are among the 10 with the highest police lethality according to the 20thBrazilian Public Security Annual, in 5th and 9th place, respectively.
According to researcher and PhD student in sociology Bianca Lombarde from the Violence Studies Core at USP, cameras have become a political dispute object, "especially among conservative sectors that advocate for less monitored and accountable police action."
According to Lombarde, research conducted in São Paulo does not confirm the common argument of those who criticize the use of cameras, claiming a possible inhibition of police action due to fear of administrative sanctions by agents, as well as the exposure of inappropriate behaviors.
"The implementation of cameras [in São Paulo] has been associated with an increase in certain records, including incidents related to domestic violence and weapon seizures. [...] This is significant because it suggests that cameras do not necessarily reduce police action. Under certain conditions, they can make this action more formalized, documented, and compliant with protocols," he assesses.
According to experts interviewed byPublic (Noun)Police activity must be subject to control and transparency mechanisms, as it involves powers granted by the state and can directly affect citizens' lives. Although it is understood that this resource is an important mechanism for democracy, during the election period, candidates for the October elections have expressed opposition to the equipment.
On August 26, presidential candidate Ronaldo Caiado (PSD), who has public safety as one of his main campaign flags, stated that he does not intend to adopt body cameras for police officers if elected.We are at war. Show me a place in the world at war where there is a camera on the police officer. Where?"What about investigating the former governor of Goiás?" questioned Caiado, who had asked the same question to the press at the beginning of September.
One of the countries that faces an armed struggle and uses body cameras is Ukraine. Since the war began in February 2022, the Ukrainian government and military forces have adopted as their official strategy the frequent release of body camera footage. Even in the United States, after numerous reports of violent conduct, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency decided to adopt body cameras as of August 8th of this year. Interim agency director David Venturella stated that all ICE agents and officers in the field would be equipped with body cameras.
Body camera shows attract web audience
While the National Congress debates who can access body camera footage, videos of incidents captured by the equipment are already flooding YouTube, such as the channel of the Military Police of São Paulo (PMESP), which has over 1 million subscribers.
Records of pursuits, operations, hostage negotiations, and even gunfights are published by the corporation. In one post, a military officer engages in hand-to-hand combat with a suspect and is seriously wounded by a gunshot to the neck. The scene is marked by the desperate cries of the injured PM and witnesses. The recording had accumulated over 800,000 views by August of this year.Thepublic media outlet contacted PMESP via email and phone, but the corporation has so far refused to comment on the matter.
According to violence researcher Ariadne Natal, "the problem is not the body camera, but the control, selection, access, and dissemination of the images. Body cameras exist to record events that need to be clarified in the future. So, [the footage] can be used as technical evidence in a trial, for educational purposes, but it should not be used for entertainment."
"It is contradictory that the issue of denying access to these images as technical evidence is being discussed, while at the same time, public access is allowed for promotional purposes," the expert comments.
Police interventions caused 60,500 deaths in 10 years.
Days before the acquittal of the military police in the Paraisópolis case, the20th Brazilian Public Security Annual Reportrevealed that 18 people were killed by the police every day in 2025. There were 6,602 deaths resulting from police intervention in the country, the highest number since 2016. The index represents a 5.8% increase compared to 2024. In 10 years, there were 60,558 deaths.
According to thesurvey, although the police officer may use lethal force in legitimate defense and in strict compliance with legal duty, "studies show that among these cases, there are also occurrences with indications of execution, in which lethal force was used without proven need."
Given this, the annual report highlighted the "importance of independent supervision mechanisms and evidence production, such as body cameras."Which 'simultaneously protects the police officers acting within the boundaries of legality and, at the same time, allows for accountability for those who exceed the legal limits of force usage'.