Tesla’s signature ‘Sentry Mode’, an anti-vandalism feature that activates exterior cameras when the car is parked, has come under scrutiny. Belgian lawmakers and regulators question whether the technology violates national privacy laws.
Vanessa Matz, Belgium’s minister of digital affairs, told parliament this week that the system, which is designed to monitor the surroundings of a parked car, is incompatible with Belgian law.
She pointed to the 2007 Camera Act, which explicitly forbids private individuals from continuously recording public spaces. She also cited rulings from the European Court of Justice that restrict surveillance by individuals to only a few, justified cases.
Unlawful
“Current use of the Sentry function is in breach of Belgian law,” Matz said in a hearing. She added that the images cannot legally be transmitted except to police or prosecutors. Her office is now coordinating with the Minister of Internal Affairs, Bernard Quintin, to determine the next steps.
Her remarks came in response to a parliamentary question from Socialist MP Patrick Prévot, who raised concerns about the roughly 21,000 Teslas on Belgian roads. He warned that thousands of drivers could, knowingly or not, be operating unlawful surveillance systems. “Tesla must comply with the law like any other company,” he said, insisting that citizens’ privacy is more important than the convenience of an anti-theft or vandalism system.
Difference with dashcams
Belgium’s Data Protection Authority has not yet announced enforcement measures but confirmed it has received multiple complaints. Under the EU’s GDPR, unauthorized filming of passersby could trigger fines of up to €20m – or 4% of a company’s global turnover – and requires clear notice to those being recorded, something Tesla’s parked vehicles fail to do.
The debate over camera technology in cars is not a new one. Belgian regulators have long scrutinized dashcams, classifying them as personal data processing when they capture license plates or identifiable faces.
While there is an exemption for purely private or domestic use, the moment footage is shared beyond the household — whether online, with insurers, or third parties — full compliance obligations apply. The 2007 Camera Act goes further, restricting the use of mobile surveillance in open public spaces and mandating constraints like transparency and time limits on storage.
Disabling Sentry?
But legal experts also point to the problem of the scope of Tesla’s recording. A traditional dashcam typically captures footage while the car is in motion. Its use is often tolerated if restricted to evidence in case of an accident.
Sentry Mode, by contrast, monitors surroundings even when the car is idle, effectively operating as a 360-degree surveillance system in spaces where private filming is prohibited.
It is not the first time Tesla’s camera system has sparked controversy. Two years ago, a scandal broke out in the US involving company employees sharing sensitive footage recorded by customer cars, which included footage of people doing their laundry, intimate behavior, and involvement in accidents. This was a clear case of privacy abuse. But unlike Europe, there’s no broad GDPR-style restriction in the States.
For Tesla owners, the implications remain unclear so far. If Belgian authorities decide to enforce the law strictly, thousands of vehicles could be affected. Owners may be forced to disable Sentry Mode or risk penalties if their cars continue to record public spaces without proper legal justification.
