Police Body Cameras Going Nationwide from FY2027 — 5ch: “Show Us the Wrongful Arrests Too”

From our other sites

The story

The National Police Agency has finalized plans to equip police officers nationwide with hands-free “wearable cameras” starting in fiscal year 2027. In trial runs, officers actually wore the cameras while on duty, and the agency says their effectiveness was confirmed. Related costs — about ¥170 million for roughly 2,000 units — have been included in the budget request for fiscal 2027.

On 5ch, some voiced concern over whether footage of wrongful arrests or police questioning would truly all be made public, or whether only inconvenient scenes would be deleted, while others called for tasers to be introduced first, or for similar camera systems to be extended to private businesses like convenience store staff.

Published 8/28 (Fri) 12:54

Kyodo News

The National Police Agency finalized plans on the 28th to introduce hands-free “wearable cameras” nationwide starting in fiscal year 2027. It judged their effectiveness confirmed after officers actually wore them on duty during trial runs. About ¥170 million in related costs for roughly 2,000 units was included in the budget request for fiscal 2027.

Source: news.yahoo.co.jp / Original article here

What people said

2AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:36
Just hurry up and roll out tasers already!
134AnonymousAug 28, 2026 22:07
Re: #2
I've seen footage where the taser didn't work and the officer got attacked back.
Just warn them first, then shoot them in the leg — that's fine.
3AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:37
Go for it.
And release everything, including the wrongful arrests police make.
12AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:39
Re: #3
Seriously, this.
I wonder if Japanese cops can stay composed when provoked, the way American cops get baited — should be fun to watch lol?
141AnonymousAug 28, 2026 22:11
Re: #12
Provoke an American cop and they'll arrest you on the spot.
Over there, arrests are handed out pretty casually.
195AnonymousAug 28, 2026 23:51
Re: #12
American police are the ones who get sulky and arrest you for some nonsense reason lol
10AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:38
They should roll this out to convenience store clerks too.
There are too many senile old folks and foreigners now — without evidence on record, there's no way to protect the clerks.
135AnonymousAug 28, 2026 22:09
Re: #10
Convenience store clerks don't move around and their workplace is fixed, so wouldn't a security camera be enough?
11AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:39
The already-heavy police uniform just got heavier.
16AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:40
Re: #11
It's not that heavy, come on.
13AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:39
Fine by me if it cuts down on dirty cops.
189AnonymousAug 28, 2026 23:42
Re: #13
The article only says it's meant to protect the police.
Bet they'll hide whatever's inconvenient for them.
14AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:39
Young people will probably be for it, but old folks will probably be against it.
15AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:40
Re: #1
If they livestreamed it 24/7 by region, I bet it'd go viral.
It'd show the public what police work looks like, which would help deter crime too — two birds, one stone.
19AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:40
Re: #15
Like a real-life "Cops 24 Hours" (riffing on the Japanese TV show 'Keisatsu 24-ji')
22AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:41
Tasers should come before cameras.
32AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:45
Re: #22
A lot of people seem to think tasers are safe, but those things can kill.
37AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:47
Re: #22
Lol, talking big without knowing the downsides.
Thick clothing can straight-up block them — they're not some miracle weapon 😄
35AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:47
Kanagawa Prefectural Police: "We object!"
41AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:51
As long as there's evidence on record,
you can win just by asking "why wasn't a verbal warning enough here?"
46AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:54
So this is just going to mean more people secretly filming others without consent.
Don't go filming people without permission — this isn't some harassment hotline.
At least make a glasses-style version and sell it to the public too.
I'd use it in place of a dashcam.
51AnonymousAug 28, 2026 20:56
And along with that,
they might as well make complying with police questioning (shokushitsu) mandatory too.
65AnonymousAug 28, 2026 21:04
For traffic stops too, they should just show the driver the footage.
Even if the person plays dumb or acts unclear on purpose, showing the video would settle it instantly.
136AnonymousAug 28, 2026 22:09
Re: #65
If you're not satisfied with a traffic violation stop, you can request that the officer show you the dashcam footage.
The National Police Agency issued a directive on this back in February.

National Police Agency instructs officers to comply with dashcam-footage requests from traffic "violators"
https://www.asahi.com/sp/articles/ASV2M4KB9V2MUTIL034M.html
68AnonymousAug 28, 2026 21:05
Re: #1
Obviously, when someone requests it, they'll actually disclose it, right?
Even footage that's inconvenient for the police.
71AnonymousAug 28, 2026 21:06
Re: #68
Hey now, just film it on your own phone.
Don't go wasting tax money over some random gripe, idiot.
69AnonymousAug 28, 2026 21:05
Make sure it records audio too, right?
That way, just like in the interrogation room, it'll be the police who end up in trouble.
78AnonymousAug 28, 2026 21:10
Re: #69 The interrogation room footage might end up kept non-public though.
75AnonymousAug 28, 2026 21:08
Other countries have been actually running this for ages already.
Kind of leisurely to be "confirming effectiveness" only now.
77AnonymousAug 28, 2026 21:10
Re: #75
Well, at least they're introducing it at all, right?
86AnonymousAug 28, 2026 21:13
No way they should get to have only the footage that's inconvenient for the police mysteriously not show up.
88AnonymousAug 28, 2026 21:15
Re: #86
Just like with dashcams, having an unbroken recording is what gives it evidentiary value — if footage goes missing because it was inconvenient, that would kill its value as evidence.
89AnonymousAug 28, 2026 21:15
Re: #86
Though it's totally plausible the police could just claim "this doesn't count as evidence" whenever it's inconvenient for them.

Background and Key Points

Just like dashcams, police wearable cameras rely on “continuity of recording” as a precondition for their evidentiary value. The point that a gap in the footage could actually end up counting as evidence against the police isn’t obvious from the original article alone. Overseas, many countries including the UK, US, and Australia have already made such cameras mandatory and put them into practical use, so Japan’s adoption comes relatively late by international standards. The budget allocated this time covers roughly 2,000 units at about ¥170 million — a scale closer to an extension of the trial program than a true nationwide rollout, given the total number of police officers in Japan, so it’s easy to misread “nationwide adoption” as meaning every officer will be equipped immediately. On 5ch, distrust over whether footage of wrongful arrests and police questioning will really be fully disclosed — or whether only the inconvenient scenes will conveniently go missing — is being voiced alongside hopes that having evidence on record will cut down on disputes; the transparency of the rules for storing and releasing footage looks set to become the key point of contention going forward.

※This article is excerpted and summarized from the 5ch (News Express+) thread “[Wearable Cameras] Police Body Cameras to Go Nationwide — Effectiveness Confirmed, Starting FY2027“.

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *