Week 2: Police and Policing Flashcards
Police vs Policing
‘Police’ refers to a particular institution, while ‘policing’ implies a set of processes with specific social functions
(Reiner 2000:1).
National Police Institutions
- Australian Federal Police (AFP);
- Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) - national criminal investigation of serious & organised
crime; - The Department of Immigration and Border Protection - recently merged. Australian Border Force established
State/Territory/Local Police Institutions
- Council rangers enforce council by-laws around litter, animals (fishing, dog registration), parking.
- Enforcement officers on public transport
History of Police in Australia
- U.K. (London Metropolitan Police Act 1829) Home Secretary Sir Robert Peel established the London Metropolitan Police.
- Australia: Not just policy transfer from UK. Policing initially performed by a range of groups including the
military, convict night-watchmen, Indigenous ‘native police’ - Many Irish and some British police migrated to Australia to take up policing roles
- Control was quite localised, up until centralisation of power over police
Centralisation of Police in Australia
Centralisation:
* Sydney Police Act 1833 – created the first professional city force in Australia, only four years after London
* Other states followed in succession
Centralisation
Centralisation: the process of bringing power under auspices of the State
Type of operational police work
a) Patrol
b) Road safety (including alcohol and drug buses)
c) Community engagement: Multicultural/Community Liaison Officers - recently identified as an area of importance in Victoria Police
d) Paperwork
e) Crime prevention initiatives
f) Maintain public order
g) Victim liaison
h) Respond to critical incidents
i) Youth initiatives
Police Legitimacy
The rise and fall of trust in police
Police Culture
Informal occupational norms and values, accepted practices, rules and principles of behaviour e.g.
* Sense of “mission”
* Action-orientation
* Siege mentality
* Isolated social life
* Solidarity
Accountability in Police
Culture of policing and the code of solidarity:
* Demands for loyalty
* Minimal criticism of other police
* Limited scrutiny of police actions (although changing with rise of portable technology – e.g. body-worn cameras)
* Ostracism of those who breach code (e.g. whistle-blowers)
Police members more frequently exposed to criminal opportunities:
* Drug dealing, misuse of information, abuse of force/position
RESPONSES/CONTROLS of Accountability Errors
Internal taskforces and reviews
* Professional Standards Command
* Lower tolerance for misbehaviour – education/deterrence
* Some external and independent accountability through Royal Commissions & in Victoria the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC)
* Coronial oversight
Discretion
‘freedom to choose amongst alternatives.’ Decisions to investigate or not, to arrest or not, to give a charge or warning, to use force or not
Responses/Controls for Excessive Force
Cameras have had an impact on accountability:
o Body cameras (and Tasercams)
o Scrutiny of reporting
o Close monitoring of trends
o Reporting encouraged
o Training focused on mental health response and conflict resolution rather than solely on weapons use
Pluralisation in Policing
Pluralisation suggests the responsibility for policing/enforcement is becoming increasingly shared and fluid, where policing is increasingly delivered by non- state personnel via the “rebirth of private policing”.
Issues with privatisation
- training quality and consistency
- discretion and accountability (who is to blame!?)
- private business – shareholders vs. public interest?
- Better or worse prospects for accountability?
