The term Security Guard (Vigilante) designates a professional qualified to perform private security, an activity of a parastatal nature that complements public security, primarily regulated by Administrative Law and Labor Law. Its primary purpose is the protection of property, individuals, and the transport of valuables, operating under strict control and supervision by the State, through the Federal Police, aiming to ensure physical safety and the preservation of assets in private and public spheres under contract.
1. Concept, Legal Nature, and Ontological Distinctions
In the Brazilian legal system, the Security Guard is not to be confused with the generic figure of a "watchman" or "doorman." While the latter perform activities of mere building surveillance and access control without requiring specific technical training or the use of weaponry, the security guard possesses a legal nature as a regulated private security agent. Their profession is characterized by the performance of activities that, although private, have an underlying public interest, which justifies intense state intervention in their legal regime.
The legal nature of the institution is that of a private múnus (duty) with a relevant social function, subject to a hybrid regime: administrative (regarding authorization and supervision) and labor-related (regarding employment bonds and occupational risks). Exercising the profession requires moral integrity, physical and mental fitness, and approval in a duly accredited training course.
2. Historical Evolution and the New Regulatory Framework
Historically, private security in Brazil consolidated in the 1960s in response to the growth of urban crime and the State's inability to provide omnipresent security. The robust starting point was Decree-Law No. 1.034/1969, which regulated armored transport companies. However, the backbone of the institution was Law No. 7.102/1983, which governed the sector for decades.
Recently, the legislative landscape underwent its most profound change with the enactment of Law No. 14.967/2024 (Statute of Private Security and Security of Financial Institutions). This new legal instrument repealed obsolete provisions and modernized the concept of the security guard, adapting it to new technologies and the complexity of contemporary social relations, reinforcing the role of the Federal Police as the controlling body.
3. Legal Provisions and Normative Requirements
The legal regime of the security guard is based on the following instruments:
- Federal Constitution: Art. 144, § 8º (although it addresses municipal guards, legal doctrine extends the logic of security as a duty of the State and a right of all, allowing for complementary private action).
- Law No. 7.102/1983: Still partially in force, it establishes standards for the security of financial establishments.
- Law No. 14.967/2024: The new Statute that defines security modalities (patrimonial, transport of valuables, armed escort, personal security).
- CLT (Consolidation of Labor Laws), Art. 193, item II: Classifies the activity as hazardous, guaranteeing a 30% hazard pay premium.
- Ordinance No. 18.045/2023-DG/PF: Regulates administrative procedures before the Federal Police.
4. Practical Application and Consolidated Jurisprudence
The practical application of the term "security guard" generates intense debates in Superior Courts, especially regarding labor classification and the right to carry firearms.
4.1. Hazard Pay (TST)
The Superior Labor Court (TST), through Precedent No. 448 and repeated decisions in Representative Resource Incidents (Theme 16), consolidated the understanding that hazard pay is due to all security guards who fall under Annex 3 of NR-16 of the Ministry of Labor. Jurisprudence is rigorous in distinguishing the security guard (entitled to the premium) from the watchman, requiring the former to provide proof of training and evidence of an accentuated risk of physical violence.
4.2. Right to Carry Arms and Self-Defense (STF and STJ)
The Supreme Federal Court (STF), in constitutional control proceedings (e.g., ADI 2.729), reaffirms that the authority to legislate on private security and war materiel is exclusive to the Union. The Superior Court of Justice (STJ), in turn, holds the understanding that the security guard's right to carry a weapon is on duty. Use outside of working hours, without specific authorization, constitutes the crime of illegal possession of a firearm (Law No. 10.826/2003).
5. Correlated Principles and Doctrinal Divergences
The institution is governed by fundamental principles:
- Principle of Complementarity: Private security does not replace public security but assists it in circumscribed spaces.
- Principle of Specialization: Requires continuous technical training (biennial retraining).
- Principle of Strict Legality: The security guard may only perform duties provided for by law, under penalty of usurpation of public function or irregular practice of a profession.
A relevant doctrinal divergence lies in the "Private Police Power." More progressive currents argue that the security guard exercises a delegated portion of administrative police power (supervision and containment), while the classical current maintains that it is merely the exercise of the right to self-defense of another's property, without any prerogative of public authority.
6. Contemporary Relevance and Impacts on the Legal System
The relevance of the security guard in the current legal system is multidimensional. Economically, the sector employs hundreds of thousands of Brazilians. Legally, the figure of the security guard is central to the discussion on corporate civil liability. The STJ's understanding (Precedent 297 and repetitive cases) imposes strict liability on financial institutions for damages caused to third parties due to security failures, where the security guard acts as the essential agent.
Furthermore, with the advent of Law No. 14.967/2024, a reduction in labor precariousness and greater clarity in the distinction between armed and unarmed security are expected, raising the standard of legal certainty for both contractors and employees.
Legal and Jurisprudential References
- BRAZIL. Law No. 14.967, of September 9, 2024. Establishes the Statute of Private Security and Security of Financial Institutions.
- BRAZIL. Law No. 7.102, of June 20, 1983. Provides for security for financial establishments and standards for the constitution of private security companies.
- BRAZIL. Decree-Law No. 5.452, of May 1, 1943 (CLT). Article 193, item II.
- SUPERIOR LABOR COURT. Precedent No. 448. Unhealthy and hazardous activity.
- SUPREME FEDERAL COURT. ADI 2.729/RN. Rel. Min. Joaquim Barbosa. Legislative competence over private security.
- FEDERAL POLICE. Ordinance No. 18.045/2023-DG/PF. Administrative regulation of private security activities.
