Attorney-client privilege in the visiting room
prohibition on unrestricted and prospective surveillance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23575186Keywords:
Attorney-client confidentiality, Criminal defense, Environmental surveillance, Federal penitentiary system, Audio and video recordingAbstract
The article examines the legality of audio and video surveillance of interviews between incarcerated individuals and their defense counsel in federal penitentiaries without a specific, reasoned judicial order. The analysis addresses the confidentiality of communications between defense counsel and clients, the prerogatives of the defense, and the legal requirements for environmental surveillance. The Superior Court of Justice held that such measures require individualized judicial authorization based on concrete evidence, proportionate to the circumstances, and limited to a specified period, in compliance with the legal requirements of necessity and subsidiarity. The Court rejected the validity of generic and unrestricted surveillance, reaffirming the protection of the right to defense and the exceptional nature of interference with attorney-client communications.
Downloads
References
BRASIL. Superior Tribunal de Justiça. EDcl no AgRg no REsp nº 1954331/RN. Rel. Min. Messod Azulay Neto. Quinta Turma. Julgado em 1º set. 2026. DJEN 09 out. 2026.
BRASIL. Supremo Tribunal Federal. Petição nº 15.556/DF. Rel. Min. André Mendonça. Decisão em 09 mar. 2026.
CORTE INTERAMERICANA DE DIREITOS HUMANOS. Caso Corporación Colectivo de Abogados “José Alvear Restrepo” (CAJAR) Vs. Colômbia. Sentença de 18 out. 2023.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
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).
