Is call recording legal? Rules by country
Most countries fall into two groups: one person on the call can agree, or everyone has to. This is a general guide, not legal advice. Laws change, and your own situation can change the answer.
Before you record
If you aren’t sure, tell the other person at the start of the call. It’s the simple way to stay on the right side of these rules. If the other person is in another country, their law can apply too. Sharing or publishing a recording is often treated differently from keeping it for yourself.
Checked 2026-10-30. If you see a mistake, write to info@regenntwrks.com.
By country
India: Depends on the region or situation
We didn’t find an Indian law that directly covers recording a call you’re part of, and courts have gone different ways on whether doing it without the other person’s knowledge breaches their privacy. In 2025 the Supreme Court let a husband use recordings of calls with his wife as evidence in a marital dispute, while some high courts have called such recordings a privacy violation. Tell the other person when you can, and get legal advice before you share a recording.
Source: Vibhor Garg v. Neha, Supreme Court of India, 2025 (SC Observer law report) · Chhattisgarh High Court ruling on unauthorized phone recordings (S.S. Rana & Co.)
Pakistan: Everyone’s consent is usually needed
In general, secretly recording a private conversation without the other person’s consent is treated as unlawful, based on press reports of a March 2026 Supreme Court judgment. We couldn’t read the judgment itself, and reports differ on how far it reaches beyond extortion and other illegal purposes. Get the other person’s consent before you record.
Secondary source: SC rules secret recording of private talks illegal (Pakistan Today, March 2026) · Supreme Court declares recording without consent is illegal (ProPakistani, March 2026) · Pakistan recording laws (RecordingLaw)
Bangladesh: We didn’t find a clear rule
We didn’t find a clear rule: the telecom law’s eavesdropping offense covers listening to a call between two other people, and we found no law or court ruling on recording a call you’re part of. The constitution protects the privacy of communications, and publishing a recording to blackmail or harass someone can be a separate offense. Tell the other person when you can.
Secondary source: Bangladesh Telecommunication Act 2001, section 71 (English text, original version) · Legality of intercepting and leaking phone conversations (Dhaka Law Review, 2024) · Bangladesh recording laws (RecordingLaw)
Iran: We didn’t find a clear rule
We didn’t find a clear rule: one article on listening to calls covers only state officials, and the general interception offense hasn’t been clearly applied to someone who’s on the call. Publishing another person’s private audio online without consent can be a crime if it causes harm or damages their reputation. Tell the other person when you can.
Secondary source: Islamic Penal Code, Article 582 (Edalatsara) · Islamic Penal Code, Article 730 (Edalatsara) · Islamic Penal Code, Article 745 (Edalatsara) · Iran recording laws (RecordingLaw)
Nigeria: We didn’t find a clear rule
We didn’t find a clear rule: no statute we found bars recording a call you’re part of, and we found no court ruling that says it’s allowed. The constitution protects the privacy of phone conversations, and the Cybercrimes Act punishes interception without authorization. Sharing a recording raises the risk, so tell the other person and get legal advice first.
Secondary source: Nigeria recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015 (SimmonsCooper Partners copy)
United States: Depends on the region or situation
Federal law needs the consent of one person on the call, but California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington generally need everyone’s consent. Sources differ on a few of these states, including Delaware, Michigan, and Nevada, so check the current state law. If people on the call are in different states, the stricter law may apply, so it’s safest to get everyone’s consent.
Secondary source: 18 U.S. Code § 2511 (Cornell Legal Information Institute) · Introduction to the Reporter’s Recording Guide (Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press) · Recording phone calls and conversations (Digital Media Law Project)
United Kingdom: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, recording a call you’re part of for your own use isn’t interception, because the offense is about making a call’s content available to someone who isn’t the sender or intended recipient. Data protection law can apply once a recording is used for business, and sharing it publicly can bring new legal risks. Tell the other person if you plan to use it beyond your own records.
Source: Investigatory Powers Act 2016, section 3 · Investigatory Powers Act 2016, section 4 · Is it legal to record conversations without consent in the UK? (Sprintlaw)
Canada: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, the Criminal Code allows a private communication to be recorded with the consent of either the person who made it or the person it was meant for, and this applies across Canada. If you’re not on the call, recording it without the consent of someone who is can be a crime.
Australia: Depends on the region or situation
It depends on the state: Queensland, Victoria, and the Northern Territory generally let a person on the call record it, while New South Wales, the ACT, Tasmania, Western Australia, and South Australia generally need everyone’s consent unless an exception applies. Exceptions differ by state and can cover protecting your lawful interests or, in some states, personal use. Sharing or publishing a recording can be a separate offense even when making it was lawful.
Source: Participant monitoring, ALRC Report 123 (Australian Law Reform Commission) · Australia recording laws (RecordingLaw)
New Zealand: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, the Crimes Act’s interception offense doesn’t apply to a person who’s a party to the private communication. Businesses and other organizations that record calls also have privacy duties, and sharing a recording with others can bring legal risk.
Secondary source: New Zealand recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Is it legal to record a phone call in New Zealand? (Sprintlaw)
Indonesia: We didn’t find a clear rule
A new criminal code in force since January 2, 2026 bans unlawfully recording non-public electronic transmissions, and it doesn’t clearly say whether that covers someone who’s on the call. Before the new code, Indonesian legal writers generally said no law clearly banned this, though you could still be sued. Spreading such a recording can be a separate offense, so the safe course is to get everyone’s consent.
Secondary source: Law 1/2023 (Criminal Code), Article 258 (Pasal.id) · Indonesia recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Hukum merekam pembicaraan di handphone (Hukumonline) · Bisakah rekaman diam-diam percakapan telepon dijadikan alat bukti? (Hukumonline)
Malaysia: We didn’t find a clear rule
Courts haven’t settled whether recording a call you’re part of counts as interception under the Communications and Multimedia Act, though a 2026 fact-check in The Star says it’s illegal even for someone on the call. The safest reading is that everyone on the call needs to agree. Courts have admitted covert recordings as evidence, but that doesn’t mean making them is lawful.
Secondary source: QuickCheck: Is it legal to secretly record a phone call in Malaysia? (The Star, September 2026) · Malaysia recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Covertly obtained telephone conversation: is it admissible in court? (Azmi & Associates)
Thailand: We didn’t find a clear rule
We didn’t find a Thai law that expressly bans or allows recording a call you’re part of, and legal writers differ on how courts see it. Voice recordings can count as personal data under the PDPA, and sharing a recording is where the risk is highest. The safest course is to tell the other person at the start of the call.
Secondary source: Thailand recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Secretly recorded conversations as evidence in Thailand (Lex Bangkok)
Vietnam: We didn’t find a clear rule
Vietnamese law protects the privacy of phone calls but doesn’t clearly say whether someone on the call may record it without the others’ consent, and legal writers differ. Sharing or publishing a recording without consent can bring civil liability and other penalties. Tell the other person when you can.
Secondary source: Vietnam recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Ghi âm cuộc nói chuyện có vi phạm pháp luật? (Tạp chí Luật sư Việt Nam, 2021)
Philippines: Everyone’s consent is usually needed
The Anti-Wiretapping Act bans recording a private conversation unless all parties authorize it, and the Supreme Court has applied it to a person who’s part of the conversation. The penalty is six months to six years in prison.
Source: Republic Act No. 4200 (LawPhil) · Ramirez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 93833, 1995 (LawPhil)
South Korea: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, a person on a call doesn’t break the Protection of Communications Secrets Act by recording it, according to the Supreme Court, because the law targets conversations between other people. A recording made without the other person’s knowledge can still infringe their right over their voice and lead to a damages claim.
Source: Supreme Court of Korea, 2002Do123 (2002) · Secretly recording a phone call (LawTalk)
Japan: One participant’s consent is usually enough
We didn’t find a Japanese law that bans recording your own conversation, and courts generally accept such recordings as evidence unless they were made in a seriously antisocial way. A recording can still be treated as an infringement of personality rights depending on how and why it was made.
Secondary source: Evidence value of recordings made without consent (mc-law.jp) · Secret recordings and admissibility (Business Lawyers)
Taiwan: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, the Communication Security and Surveillance Act doesn’t punish a party to a call who records it, as long as it isn’t for an unlawful purpose. The purpose matters, because unlawfully monitoring someone else’s communications can carry up to five years in prison.
Source: Communication Security and Surveillance Act, Articles 24 and 29 (Laws & Regulations Database)
Hong Kong: One participant’s consent is usually enough
We didn’t find a Hong Kong law that bars someone on a call from recording it, and the interception ordinance is aimed at public officers. The privacy ordinance can still apply to how a recording is collected and used, and disclosing personal data from it to cause harm can be a crime.
Secondary source: Hong Kong recording laws (RecordingLaw)
Singapore: One participant’s consent is usually enough
Singapore doesn’t have a wiretapping law that requires consent, so in general a person can record a call they’re part of. How you use the recording still matters, because using it to harass someone can be an offense. Organizations that record people have separate duties under the PDPA.
Secondary source: Singapore recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Can an organisation record a conversation without consent? (SingaporeLegalAdvice)
Brazil: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, one person on a call can record it, because the Supreme Federal Court treats such a recording as lawful evidence and federal law says it isn’t a crime when one of the speakers makes it. These rules are about evidence and criminal investigations, so they don’t settle how you can share a recording.
Source: Law 9.296/1996, Article 10-A (Chamber of Deputies) · STF Theme 237 (Trilhante)
Mexico: One participant’s consent is usually enough
Mexico’s Supreme Court says the secrecy of private communications protects against outsiders, not against someone who takes part in the conversation. The court has also said that leaking a recording can violate privacy, depending on the content and circumstances.
Source: SCJN thesis 1a. CCLXXX/2016 (10a.) (SDV compendium) · SCJN thesis text on third parties to a communication (Zeta Tijuana) · Is it legal to leak politicians’ audio? What the SCJN says (SDP Noticias) · Mexico recording laws (RecordingLaw)
Colombia: Depends on the region or situation
The Constitutional Court’s general line is that recording someone without their knowledge affects their privacy, but courts have accepted recordings in limited cases, such as a crime victim recording the crime. A 2021 ruling also accepted a participant’s recordings of a public official in a disciplinary case under strict conditions. These rulings cover evidence in specific situations, not a general permission to record.
Source: Constitutional Court of Colombia, Judgment SU-371/21
Argentina: Depends on the region or situation
Criminal law targets communications not addressed to you, but the Civil and Commercial Code says capturing a person’s voice takes their consent, with limited exceptions. A federal criminal court has admitted a covert recording as evidence, but a civil claim is still possible. Publishing private communications can bring separate penalties.
Secondary source: Civil and Commercial Code, Article 53 (Infoleg) · Argentina recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Validity of hidden recordings (Marval O’Farrell Mairal)
Chile: Depends on the region or situation
The Supreme Court has read the Penal Code’s recording offense as aimed at outsiders, not at someone who takes part in the conversation, but this is still debated. In 2024 a court of appeals excluded a two-person phone recording because one participant didn’t know about it, so the result can depend on the case.
Secondary source: Is recording a conversation between private people illicit evidence? (Correa and Duce, Universidad Diego Portales) · Unilateral recordings in Chilean labor proceedings (aguilaycia.cl)
Spain: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, a person who records their own conversation doesn’t breach the secrecy of communications by that act alone, according to the Constitutional Court. Sharing is a separate matter, because spreading the content can breach the other person’s privacy if it touches their intimate life.
Italy: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, Italy’s top court treats a participant’s recording of a conversation as a document rather than an interception, so it isn’t a crime in itself. The main limit is sharing. Using a recording to defend your rights is generally accepted, but spreading it to harm someone’s reputation can be a crime.
Secondary source: Secretly recording a conversation with a phone isn’t a crime (Studio Cataldi, 2016) · Hidden recordings: the Court of Cassation’s balance (Filodiritto)
France: Everyone’s consent is usually needed
The Penal Code makes it an offense to record words spoken in private or in confidence without the speaker’s consent, with up to one year in prison and a 45,000 euro fine. Consent is presumed if the person knew about the recording and didn’t object when they could have. Courts may accept a secret recording as evidence in limited cases, but that doesn’t remove the criminal risk.
Source: Penal Code, Article 226-1 (Légifrance) · Can a secret recording be evidence at trial? (MACSF)
Germany: Everyone’s consent is usually needed
The Criminal Code punishes recording another person’s non-public spoken words without authorization, and it has no exception for someone who takes part in the conversation. The penalty is up to three years in prison or a fine. Using the recording or giving it to someone else is also an offense.
Netherlands: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, someone on the call isn’t covered, because the Criminal Code bans recording telecom data that isn’t meant for you and its conversation offense applies to people who aren’t taking part. Data protection law can apply once a recording is shared. A Dutch law firm also says an employee who records their employer should confirm it if asked.
Source: Criminal Code (Wetboek van Strafrecht), Articles 139a and 139c · Netherlands: get the tape rolling (Littler, 2021) · Netherlands recording laws (RecordingLaw)
Poland: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, the Penal Code’s eavesdropping offense is about getting information you aren’t entitled to, so it doesn’t cover someone recording a conversation they’re part of. Personal rights under the Civil Code still apply, and publishing a recording can lead to a civil claim.
Secondary source: Poland recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Is recording a conversation held out loud eavesdropping? (Czasopismo Lege Artis, 2024)
Norway: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, the Penal Code’s secret recording offense covers conversations between other people, so it doesn’t cover a call you’re part of. Sharing a secretly made recording publicly can be a separate offense even if making it was lawful.
Source: Penal Code, section 205 (Lovdata) · Hemmelig avlytting (Store norske leksikon) · Norway recording laws (RecordingLaw)
Switzerland: Everyone’s consent is usually needed
The Criminal Code punishes a participant who records a non-public conversation without the other participants’ permission, and the federal data protection office says the other party must be told in advance. There’s a narrow exception for some calls, such as those with emergency services or about business orders and reservations. The offense is prosecuted on complaint, with up to one year in prison or a fine.
Source: Swiss Criminal Code, Article 179ter (Droit-bilingue) · Swiss Criminal Code, Article 179quinquies (Droit-bilingue) · Telecommunications confidentiality (Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner)
Ukraine: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, recording your own call is seen as lawful for personal use, because the Criminal Code’s offense covers the secrecy of another person’s calls. We found no ruling that settles this, and not all Ukrainian lawyers read it this way. Passing a recording on without consent can bring civil liability.
Secondary source: Ukraine recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Is it legal to record a conversation on a voice recorder? (NetFreedom)
Russia: Depends on the region or situation
It depends on what the call is about, because the Supreme Court has accepted a participant’s recording of a business conversation as evidence, but the Civil Code bars collecting information about someone’s private life without their consent. A recording that touches private life can raise civil and criminal risk, and spreading it adds to that risk.
Secondary source: Supreme Court allowed a recording made without notice as evidence (PPT.ru) · Court decisions on audio recording without consent (ConsultantPlus) · Civil Code, Article 152.2 (LegalActs) · Supreme Court Plenum Resolution No. 46 of 2018 (Rossiyskaya Gazeta)
Türkiye: Everyone’s consent is usually needed
The Penal Code punishes recording a non-public talk you take part in without the other speakers’ consent, though courts and lawyers disagree on how this applies to a two-person phone call. Courts have accepted a recording when it was the only way to prove a crime against you, such as threats or insults. Disclosing a recording is a separate, more serious offense.
Source: Turkish Penal Code No. 5237, Articles 133 to 135 (Mevzuat) · Recording a conversation you’re part of without consent (sen.av.tr) · Court of Cassation 12th Criminal Chamber, 2014/10205 (Hukuki Haber) · Court of Cassation 12th Criminal Chamber, 2025/1646 (Hukuki Haber)
Saudi Arabia: Everyone’s consent is usually needed
The Anti-Cyber Crime Law punishes spying on or intercepting data sent over a network, and Saudi legal writers generally read it as covering a call recorded without the other person’s knowledge. The law doesn’t directly mention someone who’s on the call, so this is a cautious reading. The maximum is one year in prison, a fine of up to 500,000 riyals, or both.
Secondary source: Anti-Cyber Crime Law, Article 3 (WIPO Lex) · Penalty for recording calls under Saudi law (Mohamah.net, 2017) · Saudi Arabia recording laws (RecordingLaw)
United Arab Emirates: Everyone’s consent is usually needed
The Crimes and Penalties Law punishes recording private conversations without consent, and legal guides say consent has to come from everyone on the call. Penalties can include prison, a fine, confiscation of the device, and deletion of the recording.
Secondary source: Privacy violations and secret disclosure under UAE law (Dr Hassan Elhais, Legal 500, 2025) · UAE recording laws (RecordingLaw)
Egypt: Everyone’s consent is usually needed
The Penal Code punishes recording a private phone conversation without consent, and legal guides read this as needing the consent of everyone on the call. The Court of Cassation has accepted a recording of a call that was itself a crime, such as harassment. Using a recording to threaten someone carries a heavier penalty.
Secondary source: Recording in-person or phone conversations (Andersen in Egypt) · Egypt recording laws (RecordingLaw)
Israel: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, one party’s consent is enough, because the Secret Monitoring Law’s offense covers listening to a conversation without the consent of any party. This doesn’t protect a recording made to commit an offense or cause harm, or to uncover intimate private matters, except in a legal case between spouses. Privacy law can also limit how you use a recording.
Source: Secret Monitoring Law 1979 (Hebrew Wikisource) · Israel recording laws (RecordingLaw)
South Africa: One participant’s consent is usually enough
In general, RICA lets a person other than a law enforcement officer record a communication they’re a party to, unless it’s done to commit an offense.
Source: Regulation of Interception of Communications Act 70 of 2002, section 4 (Department of Justice)
Kenya: We didn’t find a clear rule
We didn’t find a clear rule: Kenyan law bans interception without authorization but doesn’t say whether being on the call counts as authorization. In February 2026 the data protection office reportedly ordered a company to pay KES 700,000 after its staff recorded a call when the employee had refused consent. The constitution also protects the privacy of communications.
Secondary source: Kenya recording laws (RecordingLaw) · Recording without consent in Kenya (Global Law Experts)