A Suffolk County Superior Court judge has denied a request by the Boston Police union for an injunction that would have prevented police chief Bill Evans from requiring that some officers participate in a pilot program to test police body cams.

The pilot program was going to be voluntary. But when police officers did not volunteer, Evans said he would assign cameras to 100 officers. The Boston Police Patrolmen's Association said that violated labor rules.

Judge Douglas Wilkins disagreed, noting, among other things, that the commissioner has broad authority when it comes to matters of uniform and equipment.

On Thursday afternoon, the BPD announced that Superintendent-In-Chief William Gross and other command staff would wear body cameras in response to a request from Evans.

BPD Commissioner William Evans said in a statement he was pleased with the decision.

"I remain committed to working with the BPPA and their members to ensure a smooth implementation of the program," said in the statement. "It is my honor to serve as commissioner of one of the best police departments in the country and I commend the work being done every day by my officers. It is their continued efforts that make the Boston Police Department a national model for community policing.”

Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, who supports the use of body cameras, expressed his approval after the decision.

"I am pleased that Boston's body camera program will move forward," Walsh said in a statement. "The Boston Police Department will continue to be a leader in innovative, community-based policing, and I look forward to seeing the results of the body camera pilot program."

City Councilor Andrea Joy Campbell, who chairs Council's committee on Public Safety and Criminal Justice, said in a statement that she was pleased with the ruling and that "This is one step among many that we can take to strengthen police and community relations."

Among the issues judge Wilkins took up was that of the claim by the union that requiring officers to wear body cameras put officers at risk.

"At best, the state of the research is inconclusive," Wilkins wrote in his ruling. "That in itself is a reason to conduct the Pilot Program here. It is also a good reason to leave intact the decision of the Police Commissioner."

Wilkins also touched on implications raised during the hearing that union leadership pressured officers not to volunteer. Citing an apparent memo on a BPPA bulletin board reading "Sanction any officer who volunteers," Wilkins noted that "It appears likely that, at a minimum, the BPPA has not conveyed a strong message of support for officers to volunteer."

Matthew Segal, legal director for the ACLU of Massachusetts, which filed an amicus brief in support of the city, said the case has been more than union rules.

"To call this simply a labor dispute is spin," said Segal. "One of the factors that a court is required to consider before halting a government program like this is the public interest."

"The public interest in police accountability and police transparency matters in this case ... This is a vindication for the civil rights groups that have called for this pilot program."

The Boston Patrolmen's Association did not return a request for comment.