New Governance and the 'New Paradigm' of Police Accountability: A Democratic Approach to Police Reform

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 Q4 LAW
Kami Chavis
{"title":"New Governance and the 'New Paradigm' of Police Accountability: A Democratic Approach to Police Reform","authors":"Kami Chavis","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1354627","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The inherent power of police officers in a democratic society fuels the expectation that those bestowed with such power must be held accountable if they abuse it. Although police departments are most deserving of transparency and public accountability, police culture, often characterized by the \"blue code of silence,\" toleration of aggressive policing techniques, and lax internal oversight, impedes the effective implementation and of meaningful police accountability measures. This Article argues that local police agencies are in fact administrative agencies that regulate not only the conduct of citizens, but also the conduct of police officers operating within the agency. Because some community members are aware of pervasive police misconduct within their communities, they are unlikely to view police reforms as legitimate, especially when they are excluded from the reform process. Thus, the notoriously insular nature of police culture and the resulting community tensions create political legitimacy problems similar to those arising in traditional regulatory contexts. The storied relationship between many communities and police officers amplifies the need for political legitimacy in the police reform context. Therefore, federal intervention efforts addressing the persistence of police misconduct and corruption must be carefully crafted to ameliorate deficiencies in the democratic processes used to develop reforms. This Article contends that efforts to reform police institutions should embrace core principles of the emerging new governance theoretical framework because these principles limit community outrage and enhance the legitimacy of police reforms. Specifically, the paradigm of democratic experimentalism, a subcategory of the broader new governance framework, advocates stakeholder deliberation and local experimentation, features that contribute to overall quality and sustainability of the reforms. This Article argues that the paradigmatic shift in policing from the crime control model to community policing mode, which emphasizes police-community collaboration, is analogous to the shift that must now take place within the context of police reform.","PeriodicalId":44667,"journal":{"name":"Catholic University Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2009-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catholic University Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1354627","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

Abstract

The inherent power of police officers in a democratic society fuels the expectation that those bestowed with such power must be held accountable if they abuse it. Although police departments are most deserving of transparency and public accountability, police culture, often characterized by the "blue code of silence," toleration of aggressive policing techniques, and lax internal oversight, impedes the effective implementation and of meaningful police accountability measures. This Article argues that local police agencies are in fact administrative agencies that regulate not only the conduct of citizens, but also the conduct of police officers operating within the agency. Because some community members are aware of pervasive police misconduct within their communities, they are unlikely to view police reforms as legitimate, especially when they are excluded from the reform process. Thus, the notoriously insular nature of police culture and the resulting community tensions create political legitimacy problems similar to those arising in traditional regulatory contexts. The storied relationship between many communities and police officers amplifies the need for political legitimacy in the police reform context. Therefore, federal intervention efforts addressing the persistence of police misconduct and corruption must be carefully crafted to ameliorate deficiencies in the democratic processes used to develop reforms. This Article contends that efforts to reform police institutions should embrace core principles of the emerging new governance theoretical framework because these principles limit community outrage and enhance the legitimacy of police reforms. Specifically, the paradigm of democratic experimentalism, a subcategory of the broader new governance framework, advocates stakeholder deliberation and local experimentation, features that contribute to overall quality and sustainability of the reforms. This Article argues that the paradigmatic shift in policing from the crime control model to community policing mode, which emphasizes police-community collaboration, is analogous to the shift that must now take place within the context of police reform.
新治理和警察问责制的“新范式”:警察改革的民主途径
在民主社会中,警察固有的权力助长了人们的期望,即那些被赋予这种权力的人,如果滥用这种权力,必须追究其责任。尽管警察部门最应该拥有透明度和公共问责制,但警察文化往往以“沉默的蓝色代码”为特征,容忍激进的警务技术,以及松懈的内部监督,阻碍了有效实施和有意义的警察问责措施。本文认为,地方警察机构实际上是行政机构,不仅规范公民的行为,而且规范在机构内工作的警察的行为。由于一些社区成员意识到他们社区内普遍存在的警察不当行为,他们不太可能认为警察改革是合法的,特别是当他们被排除在改革进程之外时。因此,众所周知的警察文化的孤立性和由此产生的社区紧张关系造成了类似于传统监管环境中出现的政治合法性问题。许多社区和警察之间的传奇关系放大了在警察改革背景下对政治合法性的需求。因此,解决警察持续存在的不当行为和腐败的联邦干预努力必须精心设计,以改善用于发展改革的民主进程中的缺陷。本文认为,改革警察机构的努力应该包含新兴的新治理理论框架的核心原则,因为这些原则限制了社区的愤怒,提高了警察改革的合法性。具体来说,民主实验主义范式是更广泛的新治理框架的一个子类,它提倡利益相关者审议和地方实验,这些特征有助于改革的整体质量和可持续性。本文认为,从犯罪控制模式到社区警务模式的范式转变,强调警察与社区的合作,类似于现在必须在警察改革的背景下发生的转变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信