Research Article Open Access Double-Blind Peer Review

LEGAL REFORMS AND THE DECLINE OF TELEPHONE INTERCEPTION AS AN EVIDENCE SOURCE IN BRAZIL

Michael Smith John
Published 05 June 2025
Vol. 13, No. 2 (2025)
pp. 21-38
CC BY 4.0
  1. 1
    Michael Smith John
    Associate Professor of Criminal Procedural Law and Criminal Practice, Postgraduate Program in Law National Law School of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (FND/UFRJ), Brazil
    BR

The interception of telephone communications in the Brazilian legal system has long been considered an essential means of obtaining evidence. This practice, although authorized as an exception to the fundamental right of communication inviolability, has faced numerous challenges since its regulation in 1996. Legislative proposals, controversies, and even a congressional inquiry have marked its history. However, recent developments in alternative methods of obtaining evidence, such as rewarded cooperation, have overshadowed the significance of telephone interception. This shift is reflected in the diminishing interest of legal professionals, limited publications, and law enforcement's perception of its practicality. Nevertheless, it's important to emphasize that a lack of transparent data and official evaluation makes it premature to conclude that telephone interception has become obsolete. The true relevance of this practice remains subject to empirical examination

JournalPublic Policy and Administration Studies Journal
ISSN3065-0631
Volume / IssueVol. 13, No. 2 (2025)
Pages21-38
Published05 June 2025
DOI10.5281/zenodo.15601512
Access Open Access
LicenseCC BY 4.0 — reuse with attribution
PublisherKeith Publications
John , M. (2025). LEGAL REFORMS AND THE DECLINE OF TELEPHONE INTERCEPTION AS AN EVIDENCE SOURCE IN BRAZIL. Public Policy and Administration Studies Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 21-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15601512

 Submit Your Research to Public Policy and Administration Studies Journal

We invite original research articles, review papers, and case studies. Benefit from rigorous double-blind peer review, rapid decision within 4–8 weeks, DOI for every article, and worldwide open-access distribution.