Is it possible to photograph police officers on duty. When is it forbidden to film law enforcement officers? Stopping on an unlit section of the road

16.10.2020 Landscape design

Currently, there is no clear wording about in which situations police officers can be removed, and in which they cannot. That is, the law, on the one hand, even encourages such actions, since, according to the presidential decree, the work of law enforcement officers should be open, on the other hand, there are no clear criteria in the law. The question of when it is possible and when it is impossible to shoot police officers, AiF.ru clarified lawyer Sergey Kormilitsin: “The legislation does not contain a ban on filming law enforcement officers. Moreover, Article 8 of the Law "On the Police" provides for the openness and publicity of its activities.

In addition, the principles of openness and publicity are enshrined in the laws “On ensuring access to information on the activities of state bodies and local self-government bodies”, “On combating corruption” and “On the system of civil service in Russian Federation“. Thus, we can conclude that it is possible to take pictures or videos of employees during performance.

However, there are a number of exceptions. Firstly, it is impossible without the permission of the head of the unit to carry out photo and video filming on the territory of sensitive facilities of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The employee may demand the termination of filming, and if you do not stop filming, then bring you to administrative responsibility under Art. 19.3 of the Administrative Code. It is another matter if you try to take a photo or video of an employee who is not “in execution” at the time of shooting. IN in this case the provisions of Art. 152.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on the Protection of the Image of a Citizen, according to which, “the disclosure and further use of the image of a citizen (including his photograph, as well as video recordings or works of fine art in which he is depicted) are allowed only with the consent of this citizen”. Moreover, in some cases, consent is not required. As a result, we can conclude that the law does not directly prohibit photographing law enforcement officers, unless it is prohibited in specific cases and places and does not violate the rights of these persons.

Another thing is with the filming of the traffic police. You can shoot them. This is recorded in a special order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs "On approval of the Administrative Regulations of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation on the execution of the state function of monitoring and overseeing compliance by participants road traffic requirements in the field of road safety ”.

“Any driver has the right to film not only the consequences of an accident, but also the work of a traffic police inspector. We are talking about both the registration of a traffic accident and the procedure for registration of any violation. Whether it's speeding or passing a red light. There are, however, and limitations. If a prohibited object or object can get into the "field of view" of your lens, the inspector has the right to prohibit shooting. At the same time, an employee of the State Traffic Inspectorate is obliged to indicate by what law such filming is prohibited, ”says nikolay Gravirov, Deputy Chairman of the Moscow Federal Arbitration Court of Arbitration.

The legislation of the Russian Federation does not contain a ban on photo and video filming of employees of law enforcement agencies (Ministry of Internal Affairs, Rosgvardia, traffic police, etc.) who are on duty.

What laws are allowed to film the police on video

Legal justification:

1. In accordance with paragraph 4 of Art. 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, every citizen has the right to freely produce and distribute information in any legal way.

2. According to clause 3 of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of December 31, 1993 No. 2334, the activities of state bodies and their officials are carried out on the principles of information transparency.

In particular, citizens have the right to exercise control over the actions of employees of state departments related to the observance, protection and protection of human rights and legitimate interests.

3. The principle of publicity and openness of the activities of state bodies is guaranteed by a number of federal laws:

in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 8 No. 3-ФЗ dated 07.02.2011 police activity is open to society insofar as it does not contradict the requirements of the legislation:
on the conduct of operational-search activities;
on criminal proceedings;
on the preservation of state or other secrets protected by law;
on proceedings in cases related to administrative offenses;
on the observance of the rights of citizens (organizations, public associations).
according to Art. 3 № 273-ФЗ dated 25.12.2008 publicity and openness of the activities of state departments is the main principle of combating corruption;
in accordance with Art. 4 № 8-ФЗ dated 09.02.2009, citizens have the right to freedom of receipt, transfer and dissemination of information about the activities of government departments and local governments in any legal way;
according to Art. 3 № 58-ФЗ dated May 27, 2003, the activities of state bodies should be accessible to public control, since such a position is the basic principle of the construction and functioning of the civil service system.

In what cases it is impossible to film police officers on video

In accordance with the provisions of Art. 1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, civil rights can be limited on the basis of the current federal law, but only to the extent that it is necessary to ensure the defense of the country, the security of the state, the protection of morals, health, the rights and interests of others, the foundations of the constitutional order.

In the case of an existing ban on photo or video filming, the police officer must explain to the citizen the reason and basis for such a ban, that is, name the normative act that guides him in this situation. For instance:

art. 5 of the law of the Russian Federation of 21.07.1993 No. 5485-1 - protection of information constituting a state secret;
art. 12 № 144-ФЗ dated 12.08.1995 - protection of information about operational-search activities, etc.

In addition, in accordance with the explanations of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, it is forbidden to take photographs and video recordings inside internal affairs departments, with the exception of premises intended for receiving citizens.

To substantiate this position, the Ministry refers to sub. 25 p. 1 of Art. 13 № 3-FZ, according to which the police have the right to establish access and intra-facility regime in the premises of the internal affairs department in order to ensure safety and anti-terrorist protection.

At the same time, the head of the territorial subdivision of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation has the right, at his own discretion, to authorize filming in the premises of the police department without additional approval from higher authorities.

Is it possible to film traffic police officers on video

The latest version of the Administrative Regulations for Supervision of Compliance with Traffic Regulations, approved by order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation dated 23.08.2017 No. 664 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), lacks a clause prohibiting the traffic police inspector from interfering with drivers using recording devices, if such actions do not contradict the legislation.

According to the explanations of the head of the Main Directorate for Road Safety of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, the norm was removed from the Regulation, since it is regulated by other regulatory acts.

In accordance with clause 7.1. and 7.2. Of the Regulations, the traffic police inspector must:

know the Constitution of the Russian Federation, legislative and other legal acts in the field of internal affairs;
ensure the implementation of the above norms;
observe the rights and legitimate interests of citizens.

In addition, in accordance with paragraph 45 of the Regulation, in all cases of application of measures restricting the rights and freedoms of road users, the traffic police officer is obliged to explain the basis and reason for the application of such measures.

Thus, the regulations do not contain provisions allowing the inspector to prohibit the driver from using photo, video or sound recording equipment without the presence of special circumstances provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Can a traffic police officer film the offender on the phone

In accordance with clause 40 of the Regulations for video recording of procedural actions that are carried out without the participation of attesting witnesses, the traffic police officer has the right to use digital equipment: cameras with a video recording mode, video cameras, video recorders and other devices.

According to clause 76 of the Regulations, when exercising traffic supervision, it is allowed to use special technical equipment belonging to state bodies, as well as the use of other means of audio, photo and video recording.

Thus, the traffic police inspector can take pictures on the phone.

In addition, in accordance with the provisions of Art. 26.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, material evidence includes photographic materials, video and audio recordings, as well as other media. So these materials can serve as a basis for initiating an administrative offense case (subparagraph 4 of paragraph 1 of article 28.1 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation).

Is it possible to photograph a police officer's ID

The regulatory enactments do not contain restrictions on filming not only the employee of state bodies, but also his official ID, presented to a citizen as confirmation of the authority of this person.

For example: if, when communicating with an employee of the authorities, a person was filming, and the moment was recorded on the recording when the official presents his certificate, then there is nothing illegal in such a situation.

Moreover, in accordance with paragraph 4 of Art. 5 No. 3-FZ, a police officer contacting a citizen is obliged to: give his surname, rank, position, present a certificate, and, if necessary, inform the telephone number of the Ministry of Internal Affairs unit in which he serves.

That is, a police officer is not obliged to present his official document specifically so that a citizen can take a picture of him, since such a norm is not provided for by law.

Liability for illegal restriction of shooting

If an employee internal organs forbade a citizen to use a recording device without legal grounds, but at the same time the policeman's actions did not cause significant harm to the person concerned or his property, then such a violation is qualified as arbitrariness (Article 19.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).

If the citizen or his property suffered significant damage, then such actions are considered a crime, the responsibility for which is regulated by Art. 330 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In addition, a police officer will be involved under Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for abuse of office.

The above norms can be applied in the case of forced deletion of records from the device memory, while referring to the norms established by Art. 1252 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (protection of rights by destroying material media), a police officer cannot, since the provisions of this article apply only to counterfeit products.

Illegal seizure of recording equipment or a flash card is an open theft of someone else's property and is punishable as robbery in accordance with Art. 161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Responsibility for a citizen who illegally filming

If an employee of internal organs legally prohibits filming, then in case of disobedience to an official who is on duty, the citizen is liable under Art. 19.3 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

In this case, the offender may face both an administrative fine and
arrest for up to 15 days.

List of sources

1. Article 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

2. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of December 31, 1993 No. 2334 "On additional guarantees of citizens' rights to information."

3. Federal Law of 07.02.2011 No. 3-FZ (as amended on 03.08.2018) "On the Police" (as amended and supplemented, entered into force on 30.12.2018).

4. Article 4 of the Federal Law of 09.02.2009 No. 8-FZ (as amended on 28.12.2017) "On providing access to information on the activities of state bodies and local self-government bodies."

5. Article 3 of Federal Law No. 273-FZ of December 25, 2008 (as amended on October 30, 2018) “On Combating Corruption”.

6. Article 3 of the Federal Law of May 27, 2003 No. 58-FZ (as amended on May 23, 2016) "On the system of public service of the Russian Federation".

7. Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation of 03.11.1994 No. 1233 "On approval of the Regulation on the procedure for handling official information of limited distribution in federal executive bodies, an authorized body for managing the use of atomic energy and an authorized body for space activities" (with amendments and additions).

8. Article 12 of the Federal Law of 12.08.1995 No. 144-FZ (as amended on 06.07.2016) "On operational-search activities".

9. Federal Law of 27.07.2006 No. 149-FZ (as amended on 18.12.2018) "On information, information technology and information protection".

10. Article 1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Basic principles of civil legislation.

11. Article 5 of the law of the Russian Federation of July 21, 1993 No. 5485-1 (as amended on July 29, 2018) "On state secrets".

12. Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia of 23.08.2017 No. 664 (as amended on 21.12.2017) “On approval of the Administrative Regulations for the execution by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation of the state function of exercising federal state supervision over compliance by road users with the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of road safety. movement ".

13. Article 26.7 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. Documents.

14. Article 28.1 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. Initiation of a case on an administrative offense.

15. Article 19.1 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. Arbitrariness.

16. Article 330 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Arbitrariness.

17. Article 161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Robbery.

18. Article 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Exceeding official powers.

19. Article 19.3 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. Disobedience to a lawful order of a police officer, serviceman, employee of the federal security service, an employee of state security agencies, an employee of bodies exercising federal state control (supervision) in the field of migration, or an employee of a body or institution of the penal system, or an employee of the National Guard of the Russian Federation.

20. Article 1252 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Protection of exclusive rights.

Today, on October 20, a new administrative regulation for traffic police officers (order No. 664) comes into force, which provoked a fair amount of hype in the media. We decided to find out whether the inspectors were really banned from filming and whether it is true that you can now stop the car to check documents anywhere.

The inspector can stop the driver to check documents outside the stationary post, but must justify the need in any case.

Fasting is over

- What is the reason for the stop? - competent drivers like to ask when an inspector slows them down.

So, earlier, when stopping outside the post, the traffic police officer could not refer to the need to check the documents. Now it can. But has anything essentially changed? No, our experts say.

The inspector had the opportunity to stop outside the stationary post before, and any more or less savvy employee easily complied with the formalities of the regulations.

The new regulation, at first glance, even expanded the powers, but in fact, stopping to check documents should still be justified.

The requirements for checking documents have only become more stringent: now, at least at a stationary post, at least outside it, the inspector needs grounds for this, which are listed in paragraph 106 of the new regulation, '' explains auto expert Yuriy Panchenko.

Without going into details, the reasons can be divided into three groups: identifying signs of traffic violations, the presence of orientations or the implementation of measures.

Simply put, it is now possible to stop to check documents, but the reasons for stopping the driver are essentially the same! The inspector only needs to declare that signs of traffic violations have been identified or refer to a special operation - and the ceremonial part will be completed.

This supposedly ban on stopping cars outside stationary posts was most often appealed by drunk drivers, trying to ruin the case. But I don’t remember any court accepting their arguments, even if the inspector violated the requirements of the regulations, ”explains the auto lawyer Lev Voropaev. - Understand that the courts extremely rarely take into account the above-mentioned regulations when considering administrative cases against drivers, since the proceedings on them are regulated by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, and the procedure for the inspector's actions - including Presidential Decree No. 711, the Law "On Police ", Etc. The topic of the prohibition of checking documents outside stationary posts was initially inflated.

Secret signs

But here is a rather curious aspect, discovered by auto expert Yuri Panchenko: in the previous regulations of Art. 57 prohibited the use of automatic fixation devices at the places where temporary signs were installed. Now such a ban has disappeared from the regulations.

On the one hand, the authorized person needs to somehow confirm that the temporary sign was really installed at such and such a time on such and such a section of the road, - Yuri Panchenko comments. - On the other hand, you can first obtain confirmation of the installation of a temporary sign, for example, from a contractor that carries out repair work, and then spank "automatic" fines, even if the sign is not installed or installed in violation.

Temporary signs have a yellow background, and the previous regulations prohibited photo and video recording of violations in their area of \u200b\u200boperation

This can breed bad practice because temporary signs are often subtle, like happiness. This is not only about intentional forgery: a temporary sign can fall due to the wind, be stolen or covered by a construction machine, but the driver will be able to prove something in a few weeks unless the recording from the DVR is saved.

In case of violations recorded by automatic equipment, the proof of his own innocence lies with the driver. The presence or absence of temporary signs on the corresponding section of the road at the time of the violation will have to be proved to the citizen, and not to the inspector, which, of course, is extremely problematic, - said Lev Voropaev.

How to remove an inspector

Another overblown topic is the alleged ban on filming a traffic police inspector on video. In the previous version of the regulation, the wording was as follows: “An employee must not interfere with the use of video and sound recording equipment by a road user, if such is not prohibited by law. The employee must inform the road user making the recording about the existence of the ban. "

A similar requirement was introduced with the filing of the top management of the traffic police after a series of conflicts between drivers and traffic police inspectors, and its motive is clear - to make the traffic police officer's work transparent.

If the degree of the conversation has increased, the driver can record its content on a smartphone - the new regulation does not explicitly allow this, but, importantly, it does not prohibit

Yuri Panchenko believes that the permission to remove the inspector has not gone anywhere:

The media trumpet that for filming an employee you can get almost part 1 of Art. 19.3 ("Failure to comply with the legal requirements of the inspector"), which threatens punishment up to arrest - utter nonsense. The absence of direct permission in the administrative regulations does not change anything in essence, because the right to take such filming is determined by other laws, in particular, the law "On Information ...". There is no law that would prohibit recording a conversation with an inspector, so you can take pictures at least covertly, even openly. But I will warn against using hidden special means for recording, for example, pens with a built-in dictaphone. In Russia, even their acquisition constitutes a criminal offense. You can still shoot an inspector with a regular smartphone.

Lev Voropaev is confident that the new edition of the regulation will increase the number of controversial situations:

The inspectors had previously believed through one that they should not be removed, but at least the direct permission to do so was contained in the administrative regulations. Now they have removed it, and although this has not changed anything in essence, it is unlikely that ordinary employees will delve into these subtleties. They are more often guided by the information background of the media, where the idea of \u200b\u200ba ban on filming is being discussed, so I would not be surprised if the traffic police officers more often interfere with filming.

About "commercial" cameras

In many regions, the practice has developed when the complexes for video recording of violations do not belong to the traffic police. Their operators and owners are specialized companies that work with the traffic police within the framework of the law on public-private and municipal-private partnerships.

In the data processing center from cameras recording violations

In the new administrative regulations, this approach was formalized officially: paragraph 76 permits the use of technical means belonging, among other things, to public associations and organizations.

In addition, the cameras must comply with the recently appeared GOST, which is relevant for complexes installed after July 1, 2017.

The best way to divorce

“The old regulation on the seizure of a fake driver's license provided for the issuance of a temporary permit to the driver,” says Yuriy Panchenko. - The new regulations do not provide for the issuance of a temporary permit, and in accordance with clause 7.11, a copy of a withdrawn driver's license is issued if there are signs of its forgery. But the seizure of documents is also mentioned in paragraph 219, which is worded in such a way that it is not necessary to give the driver a copy of the license. I quote: if documents are seized, with the exception of the seizure of a driver's license, copies are made from them ... In practice, this opens a loophole for such a divorce: they stop a resting driver somewhere near Krasnodar and say that the rights have signs of forgery, in connection with what they are withdrawn.

And since paragraph 219 does not require a certified copy, an examination will be carried out, and the driver will not go anywhere. And then he is offered to resolve the issue "amicably".

The new regulation does not provide for the issuance of a temporary permit

The expert notes that such a divorce is possible, but illegal. Forgery of documents does not constitute an administrative violation, which is referred to in paragraph 219, but a criminal offense, and, in accordance with the CCP, in this case, the provision of a copy is mandatory, as stated in paragraph 7.11.

But inspectors can scare the driver for a fool that he will be left without a driver's license away from home, - sums up Yuri Panchenko. - If this happens - do not give in and demand a certified copy of the document. And if the rights are still withdrawn, and they turn out to be genuine, then go to court for compensation.

Medical examination with delivery

The regulation was supplemented by article 223, which requires police officers to take the driver from the medical center to his car, if the medical staff has not confirmed the state of intoxication.

By and large, the new regulation is an internal inspection document, and it has no direct relation to drivers.

Do I need to cram the regulations

The excitement around the new administrative regulations creates the impression that this is almost the main document regulating the relationship between a traffic police officer and a driver. Lev Voropaev explains that his significance is exaggerated:

By and large, this is an internal inspection document, and it has no direct relation to drivers. The relevance of the regulation can be said only in those cases when there is a question of holding the inspector accountable for violations, which in practice does not happen often for obvious reasons. It is unlikely that knowledge of the administrative regulations will help to terminate the case of an administrative offense against the driver (to avoid a fine, deprivation of the right to drive, arrest, etc.). It is not the primary document that would determine the activities of the traffic police, if we are talking about the practice of judicial proceedings in administrative cases against drivers

Yuri Panchenko believes that there is still benefit from knowing the regulations:

He describes all the actions of the inspector and presents an extract from the laws, and even with links to them. When filing a complaint, open the required section of the regulation, rewrite how the inspector was obliged to act, but did not act, but put the link not to the regulation itself, but to the laws mentioned there, - he sums up.

18.10.2017 We are studying a new document that regulates the relationship between the traffic police inspector and the driver

On October 20, a new administrative regulation for traffic police officers (order No. 664) comes into force, which provoked a fair amount of hype in the media. We decided to find out whether the inspectors were really banned from filming and whether it is true that it is now possible to stop the car to check documents anywhere.

Fasting is over

What is the reason for the stop? - competent drivers like to ask when an inspector slows them down.

So, earlier, when stopping outside the post, the traffic police officer could not refer to the need to check the documents. Now it can. But has anything essentially changed? No, our experts say.

The inspector had the opportunity to stop outside the stationary post before, and any more or less savvy employee easily complied with the formalities of the regulations.

The new regulation, at first glance, even expanded the powers, but in fact, stopping to check documents should still be justified.

Without going into details, the reasons can be divided into three groups: identifying signs of traffic violations, the presence of orientations or the implementation of measures.

Secret signs

But here is a rather curious aspect, discovered by auto expert Yuri Panchenko: in the previous regulations of Art. 57 prohibited the use of automatic fixation devices at the places where temporary signs were installed. Now such a ban has disappeared from the regulations.

This can breed bad practice because temporary signs are often subtle, like happiness. This is not only about intentional forgery: a temporary sign can fall due to the wind, be stolen or covered by a construction machine, but the driver will be able to prove something in a few weeks unless the recording from the DVR is saved.

How to remove an inspector

Another overblown topic is the alleged ban on filming a traffic police inspector. In the previous version of the regulation, the wording was as follows: “An employee must not interfere with the use of video and sound recording equipment by a road user, if such is not prohibited by law. The employee must inform the road user making the recording about the existence of the ban. "

Yuri Panchenko believes that the permission to remove the inspector has not gone anywhere:

Lev Voropaev is confident that the new edition of the regulation will increase the number of controversial situations:

About "commercial" cameras

In many regions, the practice has developed when the complexes for video recording of violations do not belong to the traffic police. Their operators and owners are specialized companies that work with the traffic police within the framework of the law on public-private and municipal-private partnerships.

In the new administrative regulations, this approach was formalized officially: Clause 76 permits the use of technical means belonging, among other things, to public associations and organizations.

In addition, the cameras must comply with the recently appeared GOST, which is relevant for complexes installed after July 1, 2017.

The best way to divorce

The old regulation for the seizure of a fake driver's license provided for the issuance of a temporary permit to the driver, says Yuriy Panchenko. - The new regulations do not provide for the issuance of a temporary permit, and in accordance with clause 7.11, a copy of the withdrawn driver's license is issued if there are signs of falsification. But the seizure of documents is also mentioned in paragraph 219, which is worded in such a way that it is not necessary to give the driver a copy of the license. I quote: if documents are seized, with the exception of the seizure of a driver's license, copies are made from them ... In practice, this opens a loophole for such a divorce: they stop a resting driver somewhere near Krasnodar and say that the rights have signs of forgery, in connection with what they are withdrawn. And since clause 219 does not require a certified copy, an examination will be carried out, and the driver will not go anywhere. And then he is offered to resolve the issue "amicably".

The expert notes that such a divorce is possible, but illegal. Forgery of documents constitutes not an administrative violation, which is referred to in paragraph 219, but a criminal offense, and, in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code, in this case, the provision of a copy is mandatory, as stated in paragraph 7.11.

Medical examination with delivery

The regulation was supplemented by article 223, which requires police officers to take the driver from the medical center to his car, if the medical workers have not confirmed the state of intoxication.

Do I need to cram the regulations

The excitement around the new administrative regulations creates the impression that this is almost the main document regulating the relationship between the traffic police officer and the driver. Lev Voropaev explains that his significance is exaggerated:

Yuri Panchenko believes that there is still benefit from knowing the regulations:

On this topic

Nizhny Novgorod residents, get ready: the traffic police exam has become more difficult to pass
Infographics: Polina Avdoshina
Send your news to the editor, tell us about the problem, or suggest a topic for publication. Send a photo or video of an interesting event to the mail [email protected] ... Our number in WhatsApp and Viber is 8-910-390-4040. Read news on social networks

In this article, we will look at whether it is possible to film traffic police officers in 2019.

In the amendments to the Administrative Code, which were adopted in the fall of 2017, the ban on the obstruction of video filming by traffic police and traffic police officers was canceled. This means that traffic police and traffic police officers can prohibit video filming, but with some restrictions.

Clarification of amendments

Judging by the reviews on the network, many drivers perceived these amendments as a complete ban on video filming of traffic police and traffic police officers. I would like to say that this is not so and now we will consider several points, why can be filmed by traffic police officers:

The citizen's right to freedom of action. If these actions do not infringe on the rights of other people. In the case of inspectors, a person's personal life is not affected, therefore, filming does not contradict the Constitution.
Police activity is open, in accordance with the Federal Law "On Police" dated February 7, 2011.
Citizens can easily take pictures of other people for personal needs, in accordance with the Federal Law "On Personal Data" of July 27, 2006 No.

The courts believe that these norms are enough for citizens to be able to safely remove traffic police officers without fear of unreasonable bans.

Legal restriction of filming

Despite the reasonable permission of the staff to take pictures, there is also a legal restriction on the shooting.
Here are a few points on which police officers can legally prohibit filming:

In order to protect state secrets. For example, near strategic and military facilities.
When registering accident locations the driver may be prohibited from filming if his actions interfere with the police.
In order to protect the rights of other citizens.

Can inspectors take pictures?

But police officers have the right to film drivers with a video recorder and even a telephone. This is especially true when a motorist refuses to correct violations and is rude to an official. Also, filming is allowed when drawing up the protocol, if there were no witnesses nearby.