STF defends the use of cameras by SP police officers, but rejects the defender’s action

The president of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), minister Luís Roberto Barroso, defended the use of cameras in police operations in São Paulo, but questioned the action presented by the state’s Public Defender’s Office. According to Barroso, the STF is not the appropriate means to reverse the decision of the Court of Justice (TJ-SP) that suspended the use of the equipment during a police operation.

According to the TJ’s decision, the use of cameras represents an annual cost of R$330 million to R$1 billion, directly interfering with the budget and public security policies in the state. There are still pending appeals in State Court. To the STF, the Defender’s Office requested the use of cameras on the grounds that the items aim to reduce possible abuses in police actions.

When analyzing the request, the minister pointed out that the issue has “indisputable relevance”, as, “on the one hand, the use of this equipment increases transparency in operations, curbing abuses by the police force and reducing the number of deaths in regions in confrontation. On the other hand, it serves as protection for the police officers themselves, if there is a question about the use of force”.

Despite defending the use of body cameras, Barroso stressed that, due to the impacts, it is necessary to wait for the discussion in the appropriate judicial instances, including an attempt at conciliation, and that analysis through Suspension of Injunction (SL 1696) is not possible, which has an exceptional character.

“It does not seem appropriate at this time to intervene through the exceptional means of this Presidency, as the ordinary means have not yet been exhausted. It is also worth mentioning the existence of negotiations for a conciliatory solution. In short: in the view of this Presidency, the use of cameras is very important and should be encouraged. However, the urgent and exceptional intervention of an injunction suspension is not justified.”

Legitimacy

In the decision, Minister Luís Roberto Barroso considered the Public Defender’s Office to be a legitimate party to present the request for suspension of the injunction to the STF, taking into account the public interest defended and the institution’s constitutional powers.

“The procedural rules that provide for requests for suspension of precautionary decisions, including article 4, caputof Law No. 8,437/1992, must be interpreted in a way that allows the use of such instruments by the Public Defender’s Office if there is a coincidence between the protected public interest and the defense of vulnerable social groups”, stated Barroso. (With information from the STF Advisory)