ICE kaže ne automatskim kamerama

Federal immigration officials face mounting pressure to ensure that body-worn cameras used by officers are consistently activated during enforcement actions, according to a recent government report. The report, published by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), highlights concerns surrounding the inconsistent use of these devices by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). It calls for improved policies and clearer guidelines regarding when officers should activate the cameras. The GAO report, which spans from February 2025 to September 2026, was requested by Democratic members of Congress and focuses on the policies governing body-worn cameras for ICE and CBP. It outlines several recommendations aimed at improving the effectiveness of these programs, including the implementation of automated camera activation in specific scenarios. However, ICE has rejected this proposal, citing potential privacy issues and operational risks associated with automatic activation. According to the report, ICE officers have faced criticism for not activating their body cameras during incidents involving the use of force. Notably, in July 2026, ICE officers shot and killed Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a Mexican man living in the United States for over 35 years. During this incident, the officers involved were not wearing body cameras, raising questions about the agency's readiness and adherence to policy. In response to the GAO findings, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stated that all ICE offices had received body-worn cameras as of August 5, 2026, and that training for officers was ongoing. A DHS spokesperson emphasized that the necessary training would be completed "soon." The GAO report also revealed confusion among officers regarding when to activate the cameras. Some officers expressed uncertainty about whether to use the cameras during vehicle searches or when transporting detainees. Additionally, at one ICE office, staff reportedly lacked clarity on when they were supposed to use the cameras, leading to inconsistencies in compliance with established protocols. While the GAO recommended measures to enhance transparency and public trust, DHS argued that automatic activation could lead to the unauthorized recording of sensitive interactions with informants or victims. They contended that the current system requires manual activation at the start of planned enforcement activities, which they believe better protects privacy and operational integrity. Despite these challenges, both ICE and CBP assert that their body-camera programs aim to foster public trust, ensure officer safety, and promote accountability. However, without clear standards and consistent application of policies, the effectiveness of these initiatives remains questionable, as highlighted by the GAO.