UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK
SCHOOL OF LAW
MASTERS’ PROGRAM IN LAW IN DEVELOPMENT – 20002001
CRIMINAL JUSTICE & SOCIAL TRANSITION ESSAY
December, 2000
The Boundaries of Policing: The birth of the
modern police and the rise of private security.
Guillermo Pablo López Andrade
1. INTRODUCTION
Undoubtedly, all governments must be aware that improving the quality of their
police forces is a matter of the utmost political and social importance. This
statement is based on the assumption that citizens and government have a
regular, sometimes a daily contact with each other, through different public
means, being the principal channel of this network, mainly, the police officers in
their different roles: crime prevention, public order, traffic control, buildings
supervision, watchmen, etc.
All those multiple activities of modern police, and particularly the friendly
roles[1] (giving directions, recovering lost items, finding people, pets and so on),
are extremely important in democratic societies, to such an extent, we think, that
a good relation being stablished between police and people, will provide the
government officials with the social cooperation and support they need to
develop and enforce policies to enhance different aspects of communal life.[2]
It is unfortunate, that recent rise of the private security industry constitutes a
threat to one of the major institutions of the state and certainly, I believe this
phenomenon is announcing a major risk: The rebirth of private justice.
As an attempt to highlight the risk of this unwanted social transition leading our
societies to a private justice system, this essay will try to summarize the altruistic
origins of modern police and the prevailing egotistic mission of private security
forces. At the same time, this essay pretends to show clear limits, the boundaries
at least in a general perspective, of every police structure.
2. THE BIRTH OF THE MODERN POLICE
I strongly support the argument that British Police has a very high reputation at
home and abroad (Charles Wegg-Prosser, 1997)[3]. In fact, one of the main
reasons that led my wish to study in England was based on the social values of
this country, exemplified by the police and by other representative institutions.
To my great disappointment, I have not found in British Society all the values I
expected, mainly because amongst the youths, littering in streets and public
transport seems to be the rule and not the exception. Attention paid to costumers
in stores, restaurants and other facilities is generally of a very poor quality (even
in luxury stores such as Harrods). I also found crowds walking in Oxford Street
amongst other in London, disorderly in all directions, not orderly as was to be
expected.[4]
Despite this last unfortunate remark I need to make, I feel quite satisfied with the
role the police in this country plays. The statement of the Metropolitan Police
Force, laid down on its foundation in 1829 (Charles Wegg-Prosser, 1997)[5], was
crucial for me to decide and use “The modern police” as a main topic in the paper
and oral exposition that I must prepare for my course on “Criminal Justice and
Social Transition” at Warwick University.
This statement of the Metropolitan Police Force underlines the mission of
modern police, which goes beyond the traditional role of securing public order
and solving crime. It is my opinion that any attempt to improve police systems in
countries of the South (developing countries), would not be achieved without a
compromise of the police officers to help and protect the public, as well as to
bring offenders to justice.
Those officers of the modern police and specially its leader, must fulfil the
definition of a gentleman, as Sir Robert Peel[6] explained in a letter addressed to
Mr. William Gregory, Under-Secretary of Ireland, in the following terms:
“Sir Robert Peel to Mr. Gregory.
Private and Confidential
I have completed a work which has given me great trouble, but which was
absolutely necessary, the annihilation of the parochial watch of the Metropolis
and the environs; and has given power to the Secretary of State to re-organize on
a very intensive scale a new system of Police.
It has occurred to me that if there were a military man conversant in the
details of the police system in Ireland, he might possibly be usefully employed
here. But then, he must be a very superior man to what I recollect of Police
Magistrates in Ireland. Tell me in strict confidence what is the character of the
people now employed there.
I require a man of great energy, great activity both of body and mind,
accustomed to strict discipline and with the power of enforcing it, and taking an
interest in the duty to be assigned to him. Then he must be a gentleman and
entirely trustworthy.
Do not mention this matter to anyone, but tell me, first, whether you think
£800 a year and perhaps a residence would tempt one of the Irish Magistrates to
accept the office, and secondly, whether you have any man in Ireland who could
exactly suit my purpose.
There will be a force of between two and three thousand men ultimately under
his command. With the soldier I would unite a sensible lawyer as the other
magistrate. Write to me as soon as you can.” (Reith, Charles. p. 126)
There is a considerable distance between words and actions, but my recent visits
to London, Oxford, Nottingham and Birmingham have confirmed to me that
police officers in England are in general exercising their abilities to promote
good relations with the public, certainly, with students and tourists.
In more than one occasion I have been helped by British Police to find my way,
to an address, to transport and even to know the time[7]; I must say I have always
received a courteous answer. In fact, some police officers kindly agreed to be the
photographed models.[8]
The birth of English police can be traced back in history, but the birth of the
modern police I am referring to, should be identified with the foundation of the
Metropolitan Police Force in 1829 as an instrument of social balance with a dual
mission: organized force authority and comunal friendship.
Some scholars have concluded that police functions described in the Statement of
the Metropolitan Police Force are today quite inadequate Leigh, L. H., 1985)[9].
Nevertheless, arguments are not solely made on the ethic content of the statement
but on the discretion factor involved in the exercise of the policing powers, which
from my personal point of view, is carefully included in the Plan for Police
published in 1829 in these terms:
“INSTRUCTIONS.- The following General Instructions for the different
ranks of the Police Force are not to be understood as containing rules of conduct
applicable to every variety of circumstances that may occur in the performance of
their duty; something must necessarily be left to the intelligence and discretion of
individuals; and according to the degree in which they show themselves
possessed to these qualities and to their zeal, activity, and judgement, on all
occasions, will be their claims to future promotion and reward.” (Reith, Charles.
p. 135)
We shall identify the birth of modern police, not with the use of Information
Technology facilities and high-tech hardware weapons, but with the integration
of organised forces strongly committed with the provision of help, prevention of
crime, insurance of well-being and protection to members of the public. Adding
traditional roles of keeping public order and solving crime.[10]
Modern police it is not anymore, or at least, should not anymore be an instrument
to preserve power by illegitimate monarchies,[11] oppressors or dictatorial
governments. Modern police shall act as a main intermediary between the public
and government officials. It is also my opinion that every police officer should be
a symbol to the general interest of people, enhansing altruism and preserving
order.
I do not wish to include in defining modern police the secret agencies used by
governments to prevent or punish, which is termed “political crime” (Porter,
Bernard. 1987).[12] Neither is it my wish to establish a unique date[13] for the
birth of the modern police, although 1829 is, at least in England, the clear starting
point for the new era of the modern police.
The example given by the Metropolitan Police Force in England was followed in
different countries around the world and now, it is possible to understand from
table below, the importance of friendly roles in modern police corporations[14]:
Police Force
The Tempe, Arizona
Police Department
(United States of
America).
The Pasadena Police
Department
(California, United
States of America)
Year of foundation as a
“police” corporation[15]
1949
Definition/Mission/Values/Vission (Acc
ording to the Official Police Websites)
“Mission: The Tempe Police Department,
in partnership with the citizens of Tempe,
is committed to improving the quality of
life in our City by identifying and
resolving public safety concerns.”[16]
“The Pasadena Police Department is
dedicated to excellence as a world class
public safety agency. We are committed
to establishing an environment in which
members of the department and
community thrive. We seek to be a
catalyst for positive change through
persistent, personalized and cost effective
use of public safety resources. By
embracing
the
values
of
pride,
professionalism and integrity we remain
committed to maintaining the public trust.
We Engage the Community
We dedicate ourselves to becoming part of
the
community
through
improved
communication, mutual setting of
priorities and a shared commitment to
community policing. Together, our efforts
will set the standard for policing in the
21st century.
We Solve Problems
The Santa Monica
Police Department
(California, United
States of America)
We seek to improve the quality of life for
all residents of Pasadena through a
proactive team approach to timely and
innovative interventions in community
problems. We recognize that our
employees are our most treasured asset
and the cornerstone of our department's
success. We value the diverse and unique
contributions made by pólice employees,
residents and businesses to the common of
public safety.” [17]
“Vision
The Santa Monica Police Department will
exist to preserve liberty, enhance the
safety of the community, and defend
human dignity. We will be an
organization in which each employee
embraces integrity as the cornerstone
upon which the trust is built. We will
foster an environment of honesty, trust,
and mutual respect in which the
Department and the community work
together as catalysts for positive change.
We will be recognized for our strong
service orientation, progressive
development of all our human resources,
and our application of emerging
technologies. We will embody the values
of the Department and reflect these values
in the performance of our duties.
We will continue to build upon this vision
through open communication and
receptiveness to new ideas.
Mission
The Mission of the Santa Monica Police
Department is to provide the community
with the highest quality of law
enforcement services. We strive to
continually improve the public's
perception of community safety through
eradication of criminal activity and any
conditions that have a detrimental impact
on public safety.
The New York City
Police Department
(United States of
America)
1845
We build upon our tradition of excellent
service to all. We continue to seek support
and cooperation from the community we
serve and from those of us who serve the
community. Our organizational culture is
responsive to new ideas and is one in
which all employees are given the
opportunity to develop to their highest
potential and see themselves as agent of
change. We base all our relationships on
the premise that the public and police are
one.”[18]
“Growing sentiment for a police forcé
based on what London had, a paramilitary
organization with uniforms and a chain of
command, gaverise to a municipal pólice
force in 1845 with an initial staffing of
900 men.”[19]
“The MISSION of the New York City
Police Department is to enhance the
quality of life in our City by working in
partnership with the community and in
accordance with constitutional rights to
enforce the laws, preserve the peace,
reduce fear, and provide for a safe
environment.
Values:
IN
PARTNERSHIP
WITH
THE
COMMUNITY, WE PLEDGE TO:
§
Protect the lives and property of our
fellow citizens and impartially enforce the
law.
§
Fight crime both by preventing it and
by aggressively pursuing violators of the
law.
§
Maintain a higher standard of
integrity than is generally expected of
others because so much is expected of us.
Value human life, respect the dignity of
each individual and render our services
with courtesy and civility.”[20]
Victoria Police
(Australia)
1853
“The core business of Victoria Police is
the provision of a 24 hour police service
to its customers. An effective police
organisation significantly contributes to a
high quality of life for individuals in the
community and underpins the economic,
social and cultural well being in Victoria.
Only about 20 per cent of police work is
directly related to the critical role of
fighting crime. The larger part of our work
relates to "general policing" and assisting
the community.
Since the Victoria Police Force first began
providing police services in 1853, our role
has expanded from one focused primarily
on law enforcement, to one of community
assistance, guidance and leadership.
The Royal Canadian
Mounted Police
1873
The following list provides information
about the various units, divisions and
departments which have an information
page on the Victoria Police website. To
navigate, please click on the links below,
or on the buttons on the left of the
screen.”[21]
“Mission
The RCMP is Canada's national police
service. Proud of our traditions and
confident in meeting future challenges, we
commit to preserve the peace, uphold the
law and provide quality service in
partnership with our communities.
Vision
We will:
Be a progressive, proactive and innovative
organization
Provide the highest quality service
through dynamic leadership, education
and technology in partnership with the
diverse communities we serve
Be accountable and efficient through
shared decision-making
Ensure a healthy work environment that
encourages team building, open
communication and mutual respect
Promote safe communities
Demonstrate leadership in the pursuit of
excellence.” [The RCMP Shared
Leadership process involved the
participation of over 4,000 employees
over a five month period in 1996. It
culminated in a seven-day workshop in
Charlottetown, PEI, in June of that year
which produced the following national
mission, vision and values statements
presented to the Commissioner and the
Senior Executive.][22]
My main goal it is to make clear that bringing offenders to justice was probably
the main role of the policing organisations before 1829 and that after the
foundation of the Metropolitan Police Force, this role was strongly replaced with
a sense of prevention of crime, carried out by a friendly institution identified
more with the preservation of social values and well-being.[23]
3. THE RISE OF THE PRIVATE SECURITY
Visiting Harrods[24] on December 2nd, gave me a clear idea of the role of the
private security in England: Protection of Harrods interests (“costumers”,
employees, employers, premises and products).
I must admit that it was in one of the main entrance points in Harrods that I saw
the taller, stronger and most intimidating security guard I have ever met. I
am not known as a fearful person, but definitely, I can never imagine this guard
as a first choice to ask the time, find an specific place in the store to buy a
product or seek any other assistance. Taking photographs inside Harrods is
forbidden but even if such an action were possible, he would certainly not be my
choice to mind asking such a possibility.
Tracing the birth of the private security in history is a difficult task. This is
because the origin of private property or of power relations in human evolution
may have a strong connection with the creation of a force to protect people or
guard its possessions. Nevertheless, private security is a precedent of the police
and is certainly linked with the private justice models that have operated over
history.
Despite the unclear birth of private security, it is clear that this system of
protection has increased notably over the past years. According to Mike Zielinski
on the subject, “the private security industry is one of the fastest growing
enterprises in the U.S., spending more money and employing more guards than
public police forces around the country. In 1990 alone, $52 billion was spent on
private security, compared to $30 billion on police. More than 10,000 private
security companies employ some 1.5 million guards, nearly triple the 554,000
state and local police officers.” [25]
In England, the trend is not far from the figures in the United States of America
and different estimates show that the private security is “a large, profitable, and
growing part of the UK economy.” (Morgan, Rod and Newburn, Tim. 1997).[26]
If the rise of private security is to be attributed to a lack of confidence in the
police forces, then it is interesting to find out that not even government trust is
found in its own security organisations. According to a bill[27] quoted by Rod
Morgan and Tim Newburn (1997), “it is estimated, for example, that the Home
Office alone spends over £40 million per annum on private security.”[28]
If security forces had the same role than the modern police, then probably the
figures mentioned above will be encouraging, unfortunately, it is clear that their
mission is quite different. Prevention is a term also used to describe functions
pertinent to private security industries, however, for such corporations,
prevention is sometimes synonymous of intimidation.
CCTV cameras are regularly advertised in the commerce facilities and visible
and sonorous alarms and detectors are always telling the costumers in strong
words: You are not going to steal me!
The security industry is well equipped with high-tech communications and
sometimes, armament. The guards employed in this sector are usually remarkably
well fit, have a strong character and from time to time are acompanied by a
Rottweiler-Dobermann-Mischling or any other dog alike trained to kill.
If under the argument that private security strategies are to protect customers, I
must say these forces are every day deeper involved in traditional police roles to
such an extent, that they have even created “secret services” to protect businesses
and businessmen´s hard interests.[29]
In some countries, these private security corporations are not only policing
private premises; streets and other public areas have become a field to exercise
their “power.” Sometimes, I believe, a citizen will have more contact with
members of private security forces rather than with a (public) police officer. This,
in my opinion, is dangerous for society. Instead of having a police officer in the
streets disseminating social values by his altruist actions and assistance to the
public, we now have security guards around every building or house with a
message to be disseminated too: ‘I do not trust you’, ‘I am not here to be your
friend’, ‘stay away!’
My suggestion is that if police corporations are to be privatised, we won’t have a
human link between citizens and government. The important role the pólice has
to act as balance between authority and communal friendship, will be lost and
private security forces will serve only those who pays their salaries. Furthermore,
the behaviour of security guards will disseminate among our societies a feeling of
danger and distrust; decadence of social values will immediately follow.
Another risk of privatising police forces is illustrated by the old thief-takers
system. It is well known that thief-takers became thief makers[30] and I would
like to think that some private corporations are causing crimes in streets in order
to have a strong place in the security market. This phenomenon could explain
why crime figures have been raising since security became a profitable business.
I do not want to use Harrods or Mr. Mohammed Al Fayed’s security teams as the
antagonist model for policing, but experiences of private corporations around the
world have raised several questions about the future of policing and human
rights:
·
Can private corporations and even house owners bug phone calls, rooms
and other spaces in their premises?
·
May private security teams use the word “police” in their uniforms and
facilities?[31]
·
To what extent the use of CCTV systems in commercial facilities should
be authorised?
·
Are CCTV and alarm systems used in private premises affecting the
social values?
·
Is it lawful for private security teams to use high-tech armament, to drive
at high speeds without respect to traffic regulations and other users of the roads?
·
May private security guards arrest people and even question them?[32]
·
“How may we respond to the growth of self-help and private policing
provision? Should the burgeoning sectors be encouraged and brought into the
fold, or should they be resisted on the grounds that they represent sectional
interests whose activity will undermine the integrity of the state?”[33]
We certainly have the answers for these questions, but in practice it seems that
the behaviour of some private security forces is completely different from what
law commands. A bigger question is now raised: Which one should be the
relation between the police and the existing private security forces?
4. GENERAL BOUNDARIES FOR POLICING
There is a tendecy for people who are not always committed to pay taxes,
especially in developing countries, but when time comes for security services,
payment is generally promptly served.[34]
Private sectors claim to the State that use of private security services should bring
fiscal benefits. The argument being that taxes paid for security are worthless:
Police is not achieving its goals and therefore, citizens must be relieved of some
taxes if they seek to provide private security for themselves. This petition, from
my point of view, must be rejected, mainly because encouraging private security
forces will create small states and totalitarianism[35] around them. The main
boundary has been established: The use of private security services must never be
considered as a substitute of the pólice corporations.
Unfortunately, private security forces and services are already inside our
societies and some basic rules must be considered to regulate their role. I argue
that the next opportunity of placing boundaries should be taken as soon as it
presents itself if an attempt to limit their growing power is to be seriously
addressed:
1.
The private security services shall always inform the police of their
activities on a daily basis. Any transgression to inform the police of crimes
committed inside private premises must be hardly punished.
2. The armament carried by private security guards shall never be of better
characteristics than the armament carried by police officers.
3. Private security industries shall never admit as security guards those that
have been dismissed by the police or not admitted in the police as officers. In
fact, the police must have a complete database of every security guard working in
the private sector. It is recommendable for the police to establish standards of
admissibility to the private security services.
4. Communications between members of private security forces shall be
accessible to police corporations and any incident must be immediately reported
in the security network. The police must arrive as soon as possible to the crime
scene.
5. Police officers shall never be stopped to develop their policing role in
public areas (stores and commercial malls), even if private premises have their
own security forces.[36] In contrast, security guards shall always obey the
instructions received by police officers in public areas.
6. Security systems (CCTV, alarms and so on) and security guards shall
always take in account human rights; therefore, intimidation must not be the
answer to protect private property. A training program must be carried out to
improve the social role of security guards (a social attitude), and a campaign for a
reasonable use of security technologies must be enforced.[37]
7. Trained Dogs shall only be used to detect drugs and bombs. Private
security forces must not use dogs trained to kill or to immobilise people. In fact,
a prohibition to train or raise aggressive dogs must be established for their own
dignity.
Defining the boundaries to public and private policing is difficult, but enforcing
the regulations springing out of this definition is even more complex because
it creates a conflict between two armed forces of power: The State and Private
Corporations.
In a globalized world, private security forces have more opportunities to perform
their tasks because they do not have limitations imposed by international borders.
In consequence, the national or local police forces are losing the battle against the
totalitarian state of policing I described before (carried out by corporations). It is
then my suggestion that this fact justifies the inevitable birth of a world police or
at least, of a world policing system performed by a better coordinated team of
national and local police corporations. The first task for this world policing
system shall be to establish basic standards to limit the growing and undesirable
power of the private security forces.
To limit the intimidating role of private security services may sound impossible,
nevertheless, if costumers and government work together, then, a more optimistic
future may be at hand. We must not forget that private corporations depend on
individuals and that, as has been argued by Mr. Peter Rayner, Manager of
Management Services of Harrods, the future of the store depend upon the
continuing goodwill of their customers.[38]
4. CONCLUSION
To summarize, it is clear that the roles of modern police and of private security
forces are opposed (improving the quality of life in societies vs. protection of
private interests). It is my opinion that reducing the gap between these roles may
be of help for the social concerns and values, but I strongly suggest that public
police shall always be above any private security force, regardless how important
is the corporation created for this purpose or the people protected by it.
The main point supporting my view on this case goes with a question that must
be asked to the citizens and growing generations of our societies: Do you prefer
to be surveyed by security forces of private companies or by the police of a
democratic state?
Finally, I must conclude that the foundation of a world police, or at least, of a
world policing system should be immediately included in the global agenda for
the XXI century.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Browne, Douglas G.
The rise of Scotland Yard.
London: George G. Harrap & Co. LTD, 1956
392 pp.
[The University of Warwick Library/ Shelfmark:
HF 3815.B7]
Christie, Nils
Crime control as industry: towards GULAGS, western style. 2nd and enlarged ed..
London: Routledge, 1994.
ISBN 0415125391
[The University of Warwick Library/ Shelfmark:
HF 3700.C4]
Gellately, Robert
The Gestapo and German Society: enforcing racial policy
1933-1945.
Oxford: Clarendon, 1990.
ISBN 0198228694
297 pp.
[The University of Warwick Library/ Shelfmark:
HF 3823.G3]
Morgan, Rod and Newburn, Tim
The Future of Policing
New York: Oxford University Press, 1997
ISBN 0198764413
ISBN 0198764405 (Pbk)
224 pp.
[Personal Collection/Bought from the Warwick University
Bookshop]
Leigh, Leonard Herschel
Police powers in England and Wales. - 2nd
ed. London: Butterworth, 1985.
ISBN 0406845417
315 pp.
[The University of Warwick Library/ Shelfmark: KM
615.2.L3]
Liang, Hsi-huey
The rise of modern police and the European state system from
Metternich to the Second World
War.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
ISBN 0521430224
345 pp.
[The University of Warwick Library/ Shelfmark: HF
3820.L4]
Porter, Bernard
The origins of the vigilant state: The London Metropolitan
Police Special Branch before the first
world war.
London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1987.
ISBN 0297790676
256 pp.
[The University of Warwick Library/ Shelfmark: HF
3811.P6]
Reiner, Robert
The politics of the police.- 2nd ed.
New York; London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992.
ISBN 0745009581
334 pp.
[The University of Warwick Library/ Shelfmark: HF
3811.R3]
Reith, Charles
A new study of police history.
Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1956.
294 pp.
[The University of Warwick Library/ Shelfmark: HF
3811.R3]
Weinberger, Barbara
The best police in the world : an oral history of English
policing from the 1930s to the 1960s.
Aldershot : Scolar, 1995.
ISBN 1859282237
[The University of Warwick Library/ Shelfmark: HF
3811.W3]
Wegg-Prosser, Charles
The police and the law. (It's your law series)
London : Oyez Publishing, 1973.
ISBN 0851201660.
244 pp.
[The University of Warwick Library/ Shelfmark: KM
615.W3]
Williams, Alan
The police of Paris, 1718-1789.
Baton Rouge; London: Louisiana State University Press,
1979.
ISBN 0807104914
328 pp.
[The University of Warwick Library / Shelfmark:
HF 3822.W4]
OTHER REFERENCES: Some websites have been quoted in the essay and the
Oxford’s Advanced Learner’s Encyclopedic Dictionary was consulted on a
regular basis.
[1] Good examples of those friendly roles the police has may be exemplified with
some stories about their activities during the Second World War, clearly
described by Barbara Weinberger (1995): “Relations with the public.- On the
other hand, the general public’s opinion of the police rose during the war. For
one thing, the police not only shared the dangers of the air raids, they were also
on duty to guard people’s property and homes on these occasions. In the event of
an air raid, those on duty had to stay on the streets to report incidents and check
the air-raid shelters, and this cemented the bond between them and the local
population. Sergeant March remembered that during the Blitz: [I always made a
point of visiting every air raid shelter … on more than one occasion on my day
off, I’d still go in and be warmly welcomed: have a cup of tea, have this, have
that. The mere fact that they knew you were out there looking after their homes
as far as possible, in spite of the bombs coming down and blowing them to
smithereens, they respected you for it… Interview with Sergeant March,
Metropolitan Police]. All this helped to generate good feeling, and as Inspector
Hay recalled: [Until a few years after the war, the relationship between the police
and the public could never have been better. You were very good indeed with
them. They though the world of you, they came a little closer to you. Because
remember, prior to the war, all this was you walking along with your gloves on
during the daytime, with your buttons all clean and looking round to see what
was going on, if anyone was doing anything wrong, so you were more or less an
object of fear … but once the bombing started things changed drastically. You
were then the friend for life, they got to know you, they realized you were
human. That if they dropped a bomb you would be killed the same way as they
were. This was the start of a wonderful relationship … but sadly this was lost
over the years, when they got a new generation growing up. Interview with
Inspector Hay, Birmingham City Police].
The police were the first port of call for the bombed out and homeless, the lost
and bereaved. During aids, they shepherded people into public; shelters while
themselves remaining above ground patrolling, protecting property and guarding
it from looters. According to many officers, police morale was never higher than
in wartime because of the esteem in which they were held, and the sense of
comradeship that came about through the fight against a common enemy.” pp.
129 & 130.
[2] It is important to mention that the recent political transition in Mexico (2000
Elections), shows the strong influence that police performance has in social
opinion when elections are held. Some months, even weeks before the
presidential election, two Mexican films about some aspects of corruption in the
police where shown in theatres all over the country: “La Ley de Herodes” and
“Todo el Poder”. The population and mainly youths identified well with these
movies and developed a common sense of opposition to the government
regardless the fact that movies showed old police practices and that a party
opposed to the establishment was now in charge of Mexico City Police (PRD,
Party of the Democratic Revolution). Before the movies were showed, a political
campaign jingle was generally shown in the screen supporting Vicente Fox as
candidate (PAN). As a result of which, the National Action Party won the
Presidential Election (PAN) and the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) lost
for the first time the Presidential Election after 71 years in power. Different
factors intervened for this political change, but these movies definitely called for
a public political response to social transition.
[3] “It is generally accepted both at home and abroad that the police of this
country have a very high reputation.” p. VII.
[4] Birmingham seems to be the exception. People outside a commercial area
(near the main train station), use to walk in an orderly fashion following
instructions given by visual and audible signs.
[5] “The primary object of an efficient Police is prevention of crime; the next,
that of detection and punishment of offenders if a crime is committed. To these
ends, all efforts of Police must be directed. The protection of life and property,
the preservation of public peace, and absence of crime, will prove whether those
efforts have been successful, and whether the objectives for which the Police was
put in place have been obtained.
In attaining these objects, much depends on the public approval and co-operation;
these have mostly been determined by the degree of esteem and respect in which
the Police Force is held. Therefore, each member of the Force must remember
that it is his/her duty to help and protect members of the public, no less than to
bring offenders to justice. Consequently, while prompt to prevent crime and
arrest criminals, one must look upon itself as the servant-guardian of the public
and treat all law-abiding citizens, irrespective of their race, colour, creed or social
position, with unfailing patience and courtesy.
By using tact and good humour, the public can normally be induced to comply
with directions; thus the need to apply force, with possible public disapproval, is
avoided. He who gives protection this way is a more useful police officer than his
comrade who, relying too much on the assertion of his authority, runs the risk of
seeing that authority, challenged and possibly for a while, overborne. If however,
persuasion, advice, or warning is found to be ineffective, a resort to force may
become necessary, as it is imperative that a police officer, being required to take
action, should act with all the firmness necessary to render it effective.” p. 212
[6] “Sir Robert Peel (1788-1850), a British statesman, was one of the most
important political figures of the early 19th century and a founder of the modern
Conservative Party. He was responsible for the organization of the Metropolitan
Police Force, Catholic emancipation and the repeal of the *Corn Laws. British
policemen are still informally called ‘bobbies’ after him, Bob or Bobby being a
short form of Robert.” (Oxford Advanced Learner’s Encyclopedic - Dictionary)
pp. 660 & 661
[7] Professor Mike McConville explained to us in one of the course sessions, the
real story behind the song written by E. W. Rogers entitled “If you want to know
the time”, nevertheless, despite the link of the song with a robbery attributed to
the police, the song still shows one of the friendly roles performed by British
Police. [“If you want to know the time, ask a p'liceman. The proper Greenwich
time, ask a p'liceman. Every member of the Force has a watch and a chain, of
course. If you want to know the time, ask a p'liceman”]
http://ingeb.org/songs/ifyouwan.html 09-DEC-2000.
[8] This cannot be my impression only. Before coming to England I received
positive descriptions of the British Police from different friends and colleagues
(former students and government officials).
[9] “It scarcely requires reflection for the modern observer to conclude that this
description of police functions is today quite inadequate.” p. 1
[10] It is difficult to built a consensual definition of modern police, but it is my
humble opinion, we should share those definitions that stress the benevolent side
of the police as an institution. In words of the Hanoverian publicist Johann Von
Justi “Police in the strict sense refers to everything needed for the maintenance of
civil life, thus for discipline and order and well-being among the subjects in the
towns, and for the growth of the peasantry.” I support this definition regardless of
the fact that some scholars describe it as referring the benevolent side of royal
despotism. (Liang, Hsi-huey, 1992) p. 1.
[11] It calls my attention that even before England founded the Metropolitan
Police Force, the Police of Paris was known for its efficiency to make individual
Parisians more secure (1789). Unfortunately, or fortunately (I do not want to
carry the heavy responsibility to answer now this dilemma), the Police of Paris
were impotent to save the monarchy-or even themselves. [“But while the police
had managed by 1789 to make individual Parisians more secure, they obviously
were unable to do the same thing for the regime they served. In the spring and
summer of 1789, the police became a victim rather than a master of events; the
monarchy they were supposed to protect began to fall to the forces opposing it.
Why was this failure, given the enhanced abilities of the police and their success
in guaranteeing individual security?”] (Williams, Alan. 1979) pp. 294 & 295.
[12] “It is natural for people in power to want to find out about people who
threaten their power. When the threat is a covert one, or is though to be, then it is
also natural for them to use covert methods for finding out. The most common of
these methods is a secret political force: a body of detectives charged with
keeping a watch is ambiguously termed “political crime.” Every government in
the world has employed such an agency at some time or another, and most
governments have never in modern times been without one.” p. 1
[13] In contrast with the birth of modern police in England, the birth of the NAZI
police in Germany one hundred and four years later was identified with a force to
preserve the power of the Third Reich. [“The crucial events that culminated in
the emergence of the Gestapo began with the burning of the Reichstag-fire decree
‘suspended until further notice’ the guarantees of personal liberty as stipulated in
the Weimar constitution. Section 2 of the decree made it possible for the national
government to abolish the independence of the federal states and to begin
introducing its appointees into the police and justice systems. Among other
things, the decree gave the police the right to issue detention orders to hold
suspects in ‘protective custody’, that is, without due process. The decree
suspected freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly and association, and
permitted violations of the privacy and property rights were encroached upon
when the police were given permission to exceed ”previous legal limits on housesearches and confiscations.”] (Gellately, Robert. 1990) pp. 26 & 27.
[14] The “ScanWare Associates (Selected Fire, Police & EMS links) Website ”
was an important source of information in the developing of this table.
http://www.oz.net/~gmcavoy/fire_ems.html#NL 09-DEC-2000.
[15] Some police organisations have a long history. This table only will consider
as the year of foundation that one where the use of the term “police” was
included in the name of the force. Only the available years of foundation will be
included.
[16] http://www.tempe.gov/police/ 09-DEC-2000
[17] http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/police/ 09-DEC-2000
[18] http://santamonicapd.org/information/mission.htm 09-DEC-2000
[19] http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/nypd/html/whoweare.html 09-DEC-2000
[20] http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/nypd/html/mission.html 09-DEC-2000
[21] http://www.police.vic.gov.au/about/index.htm 09-DEC-2000
[22]
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/frames/rcmp-grc1.htm
09-DEC-2000.
It
seemsthat recent changes in police goals are reducing the importance of the
general assistance to the public. (Friendly roles)
[23] Mr. Douglas G. Browne highlights in his book “The Rise of Scotland Yard”
(1956), that it appears that it was Sir Robert Peel who made an addition to the
“General Instructions for the Police” in order to include the word “principal” in
one of the most important paragraphs: “It should be understood, at the outset, that
the principal object to be attained is ‘the prevention of crime’. To this great end
every effort of the police is to be directed. The security of person and property,
the preservation of public tranquillity and all the other objects of a Police
Establishment will thus be better effected than by the detection and punishment
of the offender after he has succeeded in committing the crime.” p. 85
[24] 2000. The session held in the Core Course in relation with public
surveillance (29-DEC-2000) was a determining factor that inspired my visit to
this luxury store in London.
[25] Armed and Dangerous: Private Police on the March. The era of dual law
enforcement is here as government and corporations hire rent-a-cops to guard
businesses and gated communities and to break strikes. Now, abuses by the
private security industry and its employees themselves threaten public security.
Covert Action, Quarterly. http://mediafilter.org/caq/CAQ54p.police.html 10DEC-2000.
[26] “Various estimates of the annual turnover of the industry are available. A
1979 Home Office Green Paper suggested an annual turnover in 1976 of £135
million and, according to the marketing consultancy Jordan and Sons, total
annual sales during the early 1980s were in excess of £400 million. Jordan’s
1989 and 1993 reports suggested respectively that the annual total turnover of the
industry increased from £476.4 million in 1983 to £807.6 million in 1987 and
£1,225.6 million in 1990. One recent estimate by one of the regulatory bodies in
the private security industry has put the turnover for 1994 at £2,827 million.
Although there are various estimates of the number of organisations trading in
the private security sector, and the numbers of people employed, few of them
appear to be reliable. The best available figures suggest that, in broad terms, the
number of private security employees, including those persons involved in the
manufacture and installation of security devices, is at least the equivalent of the
total complement of the forty-three constabularies in England and Wales; data
from the government’s Labour Force Survey suggest that there are almost
certainly over 162,000 people working in the private security industry, but the
actual total may be at least half as many again.” pp. 69 & 70.
[27] ‘Home Office’s £40 m private security bill’, The Guardian, 3 October, 1994.
[28] p. 108
[29] Just to understand the power exercised by private security teams, some notes
about Mr. Mohammed Al Fayed security are here included (These are not
academic and probably not reliable, but they give a clear example of the role
involved in private policing):
-[The simple truth remains that there was a serious failure of security at the Ritz
hotel on the fatal night. The irony is that for Mohammed Al Fayed himself,
security is always of paramount importance.
"Mohammed Al Fayed is absolutely paranoid about his own personal protection,"
says his former security chief Bob Loftus. "In my last two years the paranoia had
increased to such a degree that just to walk around Harrods there would be three
or four plain-clothes personal protection team -- the people who travel with him
all the time, the A team. "But then there would be another four or six uniformed
security who would act almost as outriders. Almost as you see the President of
the United States being driven along you have the G men, walking alongside the
vehicle. So you literally had two rings of security when he was walking about his
store!" And, as Dispatches showed, whenever Fayed travels in his Mercedes
there is always a back-up vehicle which carries emergency medical equipment
and security staff. In Paris Diana's security was in the hands of Fayed's team. So
did her protection match up to his? We'd come across an enormous amount of his
almost obsessive use of eavesdropping equipment," Porter told Dispatches. "All
sorts of things have appeared from former employees demonstrating that he made
a great habit of taping telephone calls, bugging rooms, filming people and so
forth. And this we felt was quite dangerous for her, for obvious reasons." So is it
possible that Princess Diana was being bugged during her relationship with Dodi
Fayed? Certainly Kelly Fisher had no doubts that when she was around it was
going on. The whole time Fisher was in anything that was Al Fayed property she
just assumed everything was bugged. "It was a known --? Dodi told me. He told
me everything was bugged, and as a matter of fact when I confronted him about
this, with Diana, he said, 'I'll talk to you in LA. I can't talk over the phone, I'll
talk to you in LA, I'll talk to you in LA.' And when he said I can't talk on the
phone I knew what that meant." That phone call was made to 60 Park Lane -- a
property owned by Mohammed Al Fayed where Dodi stayed when he was in
London. Diana privately visited Dodi there. Dispatches also has written evidence
that Al Fayed bugged the Ritz hotel in Paris, eavesdropping on several VIP
guests. And there is now overwhelming evidence of widespread telephone
tapping at Harrods. According to former security head Bob Loftus, "The bugging
at Harrods was a very extensive operation and it was always at the direction of
Fayed.
There were things we were hearing that were totally irrelevant to the main
business of Harrods, the retail outlet, particularly in relation to South Street, Park
Lane, St Tropez even." The St Tropez Loftus referred to was one of Al Fayed's
residences in the south of France where Princess Diana stayed. So if Princess
Diana made a call to anybody on the phones in Mohammed Al Fayed's villa in St
Tropez they could have been bugged by his staff? Loftus says, "That possibility
does exist."] Channel 4 http://www.channel4.com/nextstep/dispatches/diana.html
11-DEC-2000
[30] “Thief-takers became thief makers. Their prototype, Jonathan Wild, had
subordinates who ‘stole on commission, and surrendered what they had taken to
Wild who then returned the goods to their erstwhile owners’ (Rock, 1977, p. 215)
In short, the old system was said to be uncertain, uncoordinated and haphazard,
relying on private and amateur effort, and prone to corruption.” (Reiner, 1992).
[31] a) Harrods sells a Teddy Bear with a helmet stating “Harrods Police”. B) In
Mexico, City; exists a security force called “auxiliary police” that may be
contracted by private sectors.
[32] Private courts have been developed as a consequence of the raise in private
security services. In some departmental stores the security teams are used to take
a criminal (shop-lifter) to a private room and there, the owner or his managers
will decide whether to call the police or to release the “convict” after some
arrangements and perhaps, interrogation.
[33] This question is raised by Morgan and Newburn (1997) p. 172
[34] This behaviour is not completely different from the payment received in the
30’s by Chicago Syndicates (Mafias) in exchange for protection -Clearly
exemplified in the famous TV show entitled “The Untouchables.”
[35] I agree with the remark made by Nils Christie (1994): “The major dangers of
crime in modern societies are not the crimes, but that the fight against them may
lead societies towards totalitarian developments.” p. 16
[36] After following two police officers in Leamington, I received the great
satisfaction to see that they went into a store (supermarket) not to buy products,
but to police the area.
[37] Alarms and CCTV must not be notorious but discrete. Costumers shall not
be exhibited in any case, especially if employers failed to remove the sensor
hidden in products.
[38] Transcription of an e-mail message I receive, replying my petition for
information about the security in Harrods and other aspects of the store: “Our
Ref: 65208 8 December 2000.