UNDERCOVER AGENT AND INTELLIGENCE AGENT: DISTINCTIONS DRAWN FROM A CASE STUDY JUDGED BY THE FEDERAL SUPREME COURT

Abstract

Confusion about the concept of Intelligence in public security has practical effects with significant consequences, including for criminal justice. This can be seen at the tactical-operational level, notably when field operations are conducted by law enforcement officials to obtain relevant data. In this sense, this paper aims to present the difference between an infiltrated police officer and an intelligence police officer, based on the Black blocs case, judged in 2019 by the Federal Supreme Court. In this case, the controversy brought to court was restricted to whether or not to use data obtained by an undercover police officer without judicial authorization, although it had been previously checked whether the police officer had acted as an undercover agent or law enforcement officer and what the legal consequences would be for each of these alternatives. The research method is the case study, which records data that bring out a conception that is projected on the Brazilian criminal process. The Black Blocs case will be presented in all the instances through which it was dealt with, and will be restricted to aspects involving the distinction between undercover agent and Intelligence agent. Next, a critical analysis will be presented and will highlight dysfunctions identified in two spheres: one in the field of Intelligence – a problem of command and coordination of the Intelligence operation at a tactical-operational level; and another related to criminal justice, with flaws and distortions of judgment encompassing the concept and practice of Intelligence. This paper addresses a theoretical-practical theme of Intelligence applied to public security.