Admissibility and validity of evidence obtained through telephone interceptions and the role of the Public Prosecutor’s Office

Views: 2

Authors

  • Bruno Emanuel Setubal Learte Ministério Público do Maranhão - Laboratório de Tecnologia Contra Lavagem de Dinheiro (LAB-LD) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4101-5754

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14889383

Keywords:

criminal investigation, procedural, data, telephone tapping, fundamental rights

Abstract

This article analyzes the admissibility and validity of evidence obtained through telephone interceptions, focusing on the role of the Brazilian Public Prosecutor's Office (MP). Interceptions are regulated by Law 9.296/1996, which imposes strict requirements for their authorization, such as the need for a reasoned court order and the demonstration of just cause. The article explores the criteria for admissibility of evidence obtained by this means and the challenges faced by the Public Prosecutor's Office in ensuring that the measure is conducted within legal parameters, respecting fundamental rights and ensuring investigative effectiveness in criminal prosecution.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Bruno Emanuel Setubal Learte, Ministério Público do Maranhão - Laboratório de Tecnologia Contra Lavagem de Dinheiro (LAB-LD)

Public servant at the Maranhão Public Prosecutor's Office. Experienced professional with solid strategic knowledge in information security, including risk assessment and management, compliance with best practices, IT service management. Graduated in Computer Networks (Faculdade Laboro); Postgraduate in Ethical Hacking Cybersecurity UNICIV (Londrina-PR); Postgraduate in Computer Forensics and Digital Forensics IPOG (São Luís-MA); Postgraduate in Law, Cybersecurity and Cyberdefense (VERBO JURÍDICO); Postgraduate in Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure (VERBO JURÍDICO); Law student (IESF), Extension Course in Digital Law at the Higher School of the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (ESMPU), Expert in Computer Forensics and Cyber Investigation (Judicial, Private and Administrative Expertise) in the area of Computer Forensics, Judicial Expert accredited by the Court of Justice of the State of Maranhão under No. 1603. Consultant in Information Security, Data Protection and Privacy, Researcher and author of a book by Editora Novas Edições Acadêmicas, National Register of Experts under n 022449. Knowledge of project management. Member of the Brazilian Society of Forensic Sciences (SBCF); Member of the National Association of Data Privacy Professionals (ANPPD); Member of the Brazilian Academy of Forensic Sciences (ABCF); International Certifications: CyberSecurity Analyst (CSA) - ITCERTS; ITC-002:CyberSecurity Foundation (ISO/IEC 27032) v2 ; ITC-007

References

AVENA, Norberto. Processo Penal. 9. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Forense, 2015.

BADARÓ, Gustavo Henrique. Direito Processual Penal. 6. ed. São Paulo: Revista dos Tribunais, 2016.

BRASIL. [Constituição (1988)]. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil. Brasília: Senado Federal, 1988. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/constituicaocompilado.htm. Acesso em: 28 nov. 2024.

BRASIL. Lei nº 9.296, de 24 de julho de 1996. Dispõe sobre a interceptação telefônica e regulamenta o inciso XII, parte final, do art. 5º da Constituição Federal. Brasília: Presidência da República 1996. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9296.htm. Acesso em: 4 set. 2024.

BRASIL. Superior Tribunal de Justiça. Sexta Turma. Habeas corpus nº 160.662/RJ (2010/0015360-8). Rel.: Min. Assusete Magalhães, julgado: 18 fev. 2014, publicado: 17 mar. 2014. Disponível em: https://www.stj.jus.br/websecstj/cgi/revista/REJ.cgi/ATC?seq=33803036&tipo=5&nreg=201000153608&SeqCgrmaSessao&CodOrgaoJgdr&dt=20140317 . Acesso em: 25 nov. 2024.

BRASIL. Superior Tribunal de Justiça. Quinta Turma. Habeas corpus nº 826.476/MG, Rel.: Min. Ribeiro Dantas, j. 09.10.2023, DJe 16.10.2023. Disponível em: https://scon.stj.jus.br/SCON/GetInteiroTeorDoAcordao?num_registro=202301787886&dt_publicacao=16/10/2023. Acesso em: 08 fev. 2025.

CAPEZ, Fernando. Curso de Processo Penal. 25. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2021.

CONSELHO NACIONAL DE JUSTIÇA. Sistema Nacional de Controle de Interceptações Telefônicas. Brasília: CNJ, 2020. Disponível em: https://www.cnj.jus.br/sistemas/sistema-nacional-de-controle-de-interceptacoes-telefonicas/. Acesso em: 8 fev. 2025.

CRUZ, Ricardo Alves. O Ministério Público e as interceptações telefônicas: limites e possibilidades. Belo Horizonte: Fórum, 2018.

DECISÃO que defere interceptação telefônica deve demonstrar que medida é imprescindível. STJ Notícias, 8 fev. 2022. Disponível em: https://www.stj.jus.br/sites/portalp/Paginas/Comunicacao/Noticias/08022022-Decisao-que-defere-interceptacao-telefonica-deve-demonstrar-que-medida-e-imprescindivel.aspx. Acesso em: 04 set. 2024.

FERREIRA, Ana Paula. Práticas investigativas e restrições de direitos: o papel do Ministério Público. Rio de Janeiro: Nova, 2020.

GRECO, Rogério. Curso de Direito Penal: parte geral. 18. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Impetus, 2015.

LEARTE, Bruno Emanuel Setubal. A importância da cadeia de custódia da prova digital na investigação criminal. Lumiar, São Luís, v. 5, n. 5, p. 121-136, 2023. Disponível em: https://www.mpma.mp.br/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/REVISTA-LUMIAR-2023-eletronica-2.pdf. Acesso em: 28 nov. 2024.

LIMA, Renato Brasileiro de. Manual de Legislação Criminal Especial. Vol. Único. 12. Ed. São Paulo: Juspodivm, 2024.

LOPES JÚNIOR, Aury. Direito Processual Penal. 16. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2019.

MIRABETTE, Júlio Fabbrini. Processo Penal. 24. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2015.

MORAES, Alexandre de. Direito Constitucional. 35. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2021.

NUCCI, Guilherme de Souza. Código Penal Comentado. 14. ed. São Paulo: Revista dos Tribunais, 2014.

SILVA, José Augusto. Interceptação telefônica e direitos fundamentais. São Paulo: Editora Jurídica, 2019.

TOURINHO FILHO, Fernando da Costa. Manual de Processo Penal. 17. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2017.

Downloads

Published

2025-02-28

How to Cite

Learte, B. E. S. (2025). Admissibility and validity of evidence obtained through telephone interceptions and the role of the Public Prosecutor’s Office. Boletim IBCCRIM, 33(388), 24–28. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14889383

Issue

Vol. 33 No. 388 (2025): Boletim IBCCRIM - Março

Section

Dossiê: "Desafios atuais do Ministério Público na persecução penal"

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Bruno Emanuel Setubal Learte

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Copyright of published articles belongs to the author, but with journal rights over the first publication and respecting the one-year exclusivity period. Authors may only use the same results in other publications by clearly indicating this journal as the medium of the original publication. If there is no such indication, it will be considered a situation of self-plagiarism.

Therefore, the reproduction, total or partial, of the articles published here is subject to the express mention of the origin of its publication in this journal, citing the volume and number of this publication. For legal purposes, the source of the original publication must be consigned, in addition to the DOI link for cross-reference (if any).