Sunday, September 29, 2019
Police Ethics Essay
All professions operate within a certain broad framework of code of ethics. These are rules that govern the conduct of a particular group of professionals, the conduct amongst themselves and most importantly with the rest of the society. Some of these codes of ethics may be legally enforceable and their violation may lead to criminal proceedings instituted against the violator. Contravening of the code of ethics may also lead to an individual’s name being struck off the professionals’ list like in the case of auditors, engineers and accountants amongst others.            The police force has its own distinct code of ethics both implied and express. It is these ethics that regulate the conduct of all law enforcement officers in their day to day running of their duties. These ethics may be unique to one state or universal as they are a product of social and political environment. The United Nations has its own framework of ethics within which the police or law enforcement officers are supposed to operate. These are ethics that have been fine tuned and can be universally applied (United Nations, 1989).            Police is a broad term used to denote all officers mandated to enforce the law, officers that can make arrests as well as detain a suspect.            It is agreeable that police officers are charged with the delicate duty of maintaining law and order. In the course of maintaining such order, they are bound to come across various challenges and impediments that may make them compromise their legal duties. Police exist in an environment filled with suspicion and hostility and with the powers they possess; they are likely to intimidate the rest of the citizens. They also have discretionary powers as it is not possible to spell out and dictate in the law how a certain issue is to be handled. They are expected to make split decision over who is innocent and who needs to be questioned (Hirst, M.J., 1990).            To carry out these duties, they are governed by professional ethics that guide them when carrying out their duties. In the process of carrying out these duties, police officers are expected to uphold and protect the human rights of the civilians and suspects. This is in conformity to both the national and international law. Their duty is to safeguard the interests of the public and assist public officials in the execution of their duties. These duties and responsibilities should be carried out in line with the laid procedures. Objectivity and fairness are two key ideals that should be upheld and personal interests should not conflict the efficiency in carrying out of such responsibilities.            Key to police ethics is the issue of discrimination. Police officers and other law enforcement officers are expected to carry out their duties indiscriminately. They are guided by the law and it should not be applied selectively. Gender, race, social and political status, creed or ethnic background should not be used as a basis to accord somebody harsh or preferential treatment. Almost all professions are expected to uphold confidentiality in their interactions with the public. Police officers too are not expected to reveal private details not unless it has been established that publicizing such details will help in the line of duty, for example in apprehending a suspect. The procedures and operations of the police officers should remain within the forces precincts as the release of such information can lead to jeopardizing of important missions. Every police officer is hence bound to confidentiality. No data regarding the police should be released to another party without proper authorization (Miller, S. et al, 1997.)            Police officers are expected to use reasonable force in carrying out their duties. This however does not extend to malicious damage to property, unwarranted harassment of the pubic and any other measures that are not within the precincts of what is unavoidable in the line of duty. The force applied should not go beyond what is necessary and reasonable in carrying out such kind of an activity. The police ethics are against the subjection of suspected criminals to brutality that is outside the stipulations of the law.            Hierarchy in the police force is legally and ethically emphasized. Orders and commands in the force always take downward route. As long as the orders given are lawful and do not contravene the ethics, an officer is under obligation carry them out. The superiors on the other hand are expected to have full responsibility of the actions of their juniors in regard to the instruction that they have issued. Codes of ethics also do not allow police officers to accept gifts that are attached to their work, in case of such an offer; they are expected to notify their superiors.            It is also against police ethics for officers to carry out investigations into issues that they have personal connections with unless such involvement is not likely to have a bearing on the investigations.            Objectivity is to be upheld at all times. As far as suspects are concerned, police ethics require the officers to treat suspects humanely in the knowledge that they are innocent until proven guilty. There should also be enough grounds to necessitate the arrests of such suspects (Bracey, D.H, 1992).            Like in any other profession, personal feelings and prejudices are bound to get into the way of efficiency and professionalism. Law enforcement officers sometimes find themselves in ethical dilemmas.            There are four classifications of dilemmas; among these discretion and loyalty are the most common. Police are allowed discretionary authority in their line of duty. These are powers to choose the most appropriate decision to make in a specific case. This is where personal intuition comes at play and in many cases lead to selective application of the law. A policeman is supposed to chose who to charge with a certain crime and who to leave. In making such a decision, personal preferences and prejudices may impede on the process of making of the right judgment as required by law. This is a very common dilemma (Blalock, J., 1992.).            Blacks and Hispanic community have been complaining of harassment by the police. The crime rates in the United States are that these two communities have a high prevalence rate in crime, with such a notion in the back of a policeman mind; an officer is bound to have a clouded judgment in his view of any person from these communities. With his or her discretionary authority, a police officer is more likely to arrest a black in the midst of whites in case of a fracas more than he would to a white who is amongst blacks.            Personal interests are also likely to stand in the way of executing proper judgments. This is complicated by the temptation to take bribes. It is against police ethics and also against the law for police officers to solicit or accept a bribe. References Hirst, M.J., 1990. Setting the Standards for Policing: Meeting Community Expectations, London, Association of Chief Police Officers. United Nations, 1989. United Nations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, New York Miller, Seumas, Blackler, John, & Alexandra, Andrew, 1997. Police Ethics, Sydney: Allen & Unwin.. Blalock, J., 1992. Mismanagement and Corruption. Police Studies 15(4). Bracey, D.H, 1992. Police Corruption and Community Relations: Community Policing. Police Studies 15(4).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.