One point worth making is that in many cases the community demands timely redress when crime (burglary, assault, etc) occurs. In the absence of timely redress (offenders prosecuted, property returned), it is the community itself that begins to tolerate human rights violations by insisting on swift action. Police officers can sometimes feel under pressure to deliver results quickly, hence - however reluctantly - they may engage in questionable conduct in order to satisfy the community.

If police are trained professionally with good investigative technique, they'll be able to deliver results without having to engage in such conduct.

 Therefore, professional training content forms part of a continuum along with human rights training content; they aren't two totally different entities.

 

I think it is of utmost importance that if human rights advocates decide to step into the field of training the police they do so within the limits of their own expertise which means they should stick to human rights and refrain from training professional policing skills to police officers.

This sounds like a simple principle but in practice it turns out to be rather difficult to comply with. This is largely because over the years it has proven to be a 'good practice' to integrate human rights training in general police training and relate it to police practice. This may lead, in practice, to it being a thin line between training human rights 'sec' and training police professional skills. This is not a problem (at all) when the training is carried out by police trainers, but when it is done by human rights groups a problem may arise as it may lead to human rights advocates finding themselves in a position where they are de facto training police.

Yet, it is important that human rights advocates do not become police trainers as such, for a number of reasons. First of all because it is not the human rights community that should take, nor accept, responsibility for training the police, as this is first and formeost a responsibility of the police (or in some countries the Home Ministry) itself. Clearly, this responsibility includes the responsibility to train new recruits in human rights (as well as those officers already serving). Secondly it may lead to the human rights groups involved to being coopted, which obviously becomes particularly sensitive in situations where police have commited human rights violations after having been trained on this issue. Thirdly training the police may easily take away a significant portion of the resources of the human rights groups involved, with potentially limited impact. This is not to say that human rights groups should refrain totally from training the police, but it does mean that they should think twice when stepping into this field, about what it means for their own organization, their relationship with the police but also with fellow human rights groups, and most importantly: what exactly they are seeking to achieve (through training). It may turn out that for example assessing the existing curriculum from a human rights perspective and suggesting improvements, is a better (and less complicated) step to take first.

Obviously human rights groups can, and do, conduct training. And it is important that they continue doing so as it helps them to get a better understanding of the police and police realities, and also helps to establish personal relations with (a number of) police officers. This often turns out to be an important first step in more long term engagement which can prove useful when working on police reform and relaizing more sustainable changes in police practice.

 

 

I don't think that the distinction 'human rights v professional' is a good one. The two different aspects of police education/training might better be expressed as 'behavioural' and 'technical', and these are interdependent - not in opposition.  A police official needs to be educated in a behavioural sense (to be aware of what human rights are, the relationship between human rights and policing, what his or her powers are and the limits on them). A police official who behaves badly, who abuses his or her powers, can never be considered to be a professional. He or she also needs to be trained in a technical sense - for example to know how to interview witnesses and suspects, how to gather evidence, how to use force lawfully and so on. If a police official lacks technical skills such as these he or she is much more likely to resort to unlawful methods (violate human rights) to get results.

As far as legal content is concerned, at the very least police officials need to know the powers ( to use force, to arrest/detain, to search etc) granted to them by law and the limitations on those powers. They also need to know what evidence is required to prove specific crimes or offences (ie the points to prove - what elements constitute specific crimes) so that they can assemble the best evidence and make out a convincing case to support the charges brought against an accused person.

I think that the law enforcement officers training is very important, but the most important thing is to supervise the law enforcement officers..

I would like to make a couple of points in relation to training.

Firstly, as several contributors have already pointed out, a professional input is essential but not just from the point of view of the technical aspects of police work. Law enforcement officers are, in general, quite conservative and form part of a close knit community, often suspicious of outsiders. They may regard someone who has the tag 'human rights activist' or 'human rights trainer' attached to them as a threat, there to make their job more difficult. That is not to say that people with human rights expertise have no role in police training, quite the opposite; just that there must be someone there who has credibility with the trainees. I would also go so far as to say that the fact that someone is a police officer or has a law enforcement background does not automatically grant them credibility. In my own country (UK) police trainers themselves sometimes lack credibility and I have seen the same thing in other countries.  Operational officers can be very harsh and demanding in their judgements and so, if possible, someone with operational credibility and who will therefore be listened to should be involved (I know that this is not always possible).

In relation to content, whilst it is important to outline human rights principles, in my view it is more important to ensure that these are mainstreamed into general training and put into context. Police officers generally know that it is against the law to torture and ill-treat suspects. Often, what they lack are the professional skills to deal with suspects properly. This, together with pressure to obtain results from senior officers, government and prosecutors, often results in them feeling that they have no other option other than to use force to obtain confessions and thereby satisfy the demands made on them. Thus a culture develops where it can be the norm for suspects to be ill-treated. Giving police those professional skills and changing the culture is not always easy and demands lots of time, effort and money, which are not always available in many countries. But I believe this is the only effective approach.

An approach that appeals to law enforcement officers is to set out clearly the practical arguments against using torture and ill-treatment. Police officers are in general very practical and pragmatic individuals and want to obtain results and my experience of using these arguments is that they usually keep the attention of the audience better than just setting out the content of international conventions. The practical reasons for not using torture (i.e. that it is ineffective in obtaining genuine results) are set out clearly in the APT publication 'Defusing the Ticking Bomb Scenario' available at www.apt.ch .

Police officers also sometimes need to have it explained to them why human rights can help them and that they are not something designed to make their jobs more difficult. I summarised the arguments in a presentation I did last year in which I also set out some of the practical arguments against torture. I hope I can be allowed to follow Ralph's precedent and to reproduce it here, which is easier and quicker for me.

Finally, I think it is also important that training is not delivered to police officers in isolation. The effort put into training them will be diluted if judges, prosecutors and others, who all influence police working practices, carry on as normal.

INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE IN PRE-TRIAL DETENTION CLOSING ROUNDTABLE – HANOI, 4TH/5TH MARCH 2008 The Role of the Police in Upholding Human Rights  Presentation Abstract: Mr Michael KellettFormer Detective Chief Inspector, British Police Service and former Police Advisor to the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture  

At last September’s Roundtable Conference here in Hanoi and in the six workshops that took place in Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City and Nha Trang at the end of last year and the beginning of this year, we concentrated largely on the technical aspects of human rights as they relate to the work of the police and based on our seven focus areas. We looked at the international instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention Against Torture and we also examined Vietnamese domestic legislation. Further, we dealt with the practical detail of operational features of human rights in policing, such as health and safety, independent monitoring mechanisms and the investigation of allegations of torture and ill-treatment. Today I would like to pull together the various strands of our discussions and examine in more detail the principles underlying the role of the police in upholding human rights.

 

I think it is a good idea to remind ourselves from time to time why the police should uphold human rights and to do this it is vital to understand the purpose of policing. This of course has a number of dimensions but the most important in my view, is the relationship between the police and the citizen. In the former Soviet Union and in the states of the former eastern bloc, the prime purpose of the police was to protect the government and the state (often, in effect, these were same thing) from the population. However, in modern western democracies the principle is that the police exist to protect individual and collective freedoms but at the same time are there to represent the authority of the state. If these two examples can be said to represent the two extremes of the police/citizen relationship spectrum, I would say that human rights are clearly a more important consideration for the police in the latter than in the former. And I should perhaps also point out that not all western democracies have achieved the ideal and that some are closer to the human rights end of the spectrum than others. I do not know enough about Vietnamese society to say authoritatively exactly where you are on that spectrum but my involvement in this project during the last twelve months tells me that the Vietnamese Police are taking the issue of human rights seriously, even if, as with many other countries, there is still much work to be done.

 

There is of course a delicate balance here and even in those police forces that are closer to the human rights end of the spectrum, in practice there is often a tension between human rights and policing. Of course, that tension is one of the reasons that this project has taken place in the first place. But the fundamental principle is that the prime duty of the police is to uphold human rights. This was set out explicitly and very powerfully a few years ago in a report into policing in Northern Ireland written by the former Governor of Hong Kong, Christopher Patten, as a result of which major changes were made to the organisation and structure of the police in that part of the United Kingdom. The report said:

 ‘It is a central proposition of this report that the fundamental purpose of policing should be .... the protection and vindication of the human rights of all. .... Article 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: “everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realised”. The role of the police is to help achieve that social and international order. They must, for example, uphold the laws that safeguard the lives of citizens. There should be no conflict between human rights and policing. Policing means protecting human rights’.[1] 

That is a very clear statement but, as the report went on to point out, not so easy to implement in practice. Judgements that police officers make every day, often split second decisions, can determine the difference between good policing and bad policing, between effective policing and ineffective policing. In several of the workshops I stated that human rights are not something that the police should be afraid of but rather something to be embraced because applying human rights principles aids effective policing and that is an argument I will develop shortly. However, for the moment, let us stay with more general principles.

 

There are a number of general reasons why the police should uphold human rights and the first of these is, quite simply, that human rights are protected by law - by international law and the by constitutions and laws of states and this applies to Vietnam just as it does to every other country in the world.[2] Police are law enforcement officials who have a duty to respect and enforce laws which protect human rights as equally as they have a duty to respect and enforce other laws. They are not entitled to violate human rights laws when enforcing those other laws. If they do so, they are not reducing criminality but rather they are adding to it and committing crimes themselves.

 

Secondly, when the police enforce the law by seeking to prevent and detect crime or to prevent public disorder or to hold detainees in lawful pre-trial detention, they are upholding the human rights of all citizens. Some police officers appear to hold the view that human rights are something designed to protect criminals and to make their jobs more difficult. Nothing could be further from the truth. Human rights apply to victims of crime just as much as they apply to those suspected of crime – and they apply to police officers just as much as they apply to other citizens. The rights of victims and suspects have to be balanced of course but one class does not have primacy over the other. This principle has been formally recognised in Europe in recent years by an increasing frequency of decisions made by the European Court of Human Rights, in which the importance of the victim’s position has been firmly recognised by stating that a failure by police to mount an effective investigation into criminal acts can in itself amount to a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights.[3]

 

In developing this theme and moving on to the practical consequences of police failing to uphold human rights, I would refer back to Article 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights quoted above, in which it is stated that everyone is entitled to ‘social order’. Social order, ‘as characterised by tolerable levels of criminality and low levels of civil tension or unrest is heavily contingent upon effective policing’.[4] But social order cannot be said to exist when there is illegality and violation of human rights in the process of law enforcement. ‘”Order” secured by abuse of power is the ultimate disorder and a complete negation of the notion of law enforcement’.[5] And of course, eventually, this type of ‘order’ inevitably breaks down and those subjected to it are likely to rebel. In the United Kingdom we experienced this in the early part of the 1980s, when serious public disorder occurred in our major cities, the spark for which was what was perceived to be the oppressive use of police powers towards ethnic minority communities. This was indeed a failure of policing, due in significant part to human rights abuses. Similar disorder has occurred recently in France. But the adverse consequences for policing are not limited to the outbreak of disorder. Police who are seen to abuse human rights lose the trust of the communities in which they work, thereby rendering effective policing of those communities difficult, if not impossible. Effective policing is only possible with the consent of those who are policed and when consent is withdrawn the police become at best almost redundant and at worst, agents of repression.

 

I think it may be appropriate here to say a few words about the abuse of human rights in ‘extreme circumstances’, something which in these days of international terrorism is very topical. When confronted with grave and horrendous crimes and when dealing with hardened criminals and terrorists and under pressure to obtain results quickly, police can be tempted to breach legal and ethical standards and to engage in torture and ill-treatment. This is not just theory but reality and in at least one country, the United States of America, it has apparently become official government policy.[6] It is not my intention to rehearse the ethical and legal arguments against torture, which are manifold and deserving of at least one roundtable conference of their own, but rather to outline the practical consequences of it for the work of the police.[7]

 

The plain fact is that torture simply does not work. It is an ineffective investigation tool. Persons under torture or the threat of torture can be made to admit to the most grievous crimes, even when they are innocent of any wrongdoing and the police may not know if what is admitted is true. The result is that innocent people may be imprisoned and the guilty may be left free to commit further serious crimes. This is not simple hypothesis but the painful experience of my own country where, in the 1970s and 1980s, a number of innocent people were convicted of serious terrorist related crimes and of horrific murders, as a result of confessions obtained following ill-treatment or the threat of ill-treatment.

 

Other practical consequences for the police are that, once violence or the threat of it has been introduced into the relationship with the suspect, it is almost impossible to use any other legitimate interrogation technique. And as the investigators among you will know very well, some of the best informants are recruited from those who have been arrested; using or threatening violence against suspects will almost always make it impossible to recruit them as informants, thus further inhibiting the effectiveness of the police.

 

Finally, if a police force becomes known for using torture or otherwise breaching human rights, legitimate law enforcement agencies in other countries will be reluctant to deal with them, thus affecting international cooperation in the investigation of crime. Furthermore, it will be almost impossible to have anyone extradited. Once again, this is not just hypothesis but recent experience. Only a few weeks ago Canada placed its close ally and neighbour, the United States, on an official Foreign Ministry list of countries where torture is an issue of concern[8] and in my own country, we have been wrestling for several years with the serious and difficult problem of what to do with some twenty suspected Islamic terrorists, resident in the UK and many of them wanted in their own countries but whom the British courts refuse to authorise to be extradited or deported, on the grounds that they are at risk of being tortured if returned home.

 

I do not want to give the impression that the only reason for police adhering to human rights principles is that there are negative consequences for failing to do so, although I hope I have illustrated that there are indeed negative consequences, both for the police and for the citizen. But there are also positive reasons for adhering to human rights principles, not least that doing so impels police to become more professional in their work and thus more effective. Abusing or neglecting human rights could almost be said to be ‘lazy policing’. For example, it is a relatively quick and easy task to force a confession out of a suspect by ill-treating him. It can be a little more time consuming to gather enough evidence to make it irrelevant whether or not a suspect confesses. But in the first case, there is always a doubt that the guilty party has been convicted, in the second case there is no such doubt. The list of benefits from applying human rights principles is long and we covered many of them in the workshops. It is true that adopting them implies more training and almost certainly some changes in working practices but they are worth it.

 

Human rights are not an alien concept imposed on law enforcers and inhibiting them from carrying out their duties effectively. Rather the reverse – they are a basic and essential foundation of policing in the modern world. Without them, policing risks becoming oppressive; with them and when combined with an effective training system, they are a powerful means of protecting society ethically and successfully. When first confronted with the requirement to adhere to human rights principles in their work, it is understandable if some police officers, not used to the concept, experience anxiety and concern. However, the experience of police in the UK and elsewhere is that they can be quickly assimilated into everyday practice – they are after all, no more than common sense and the exercise of basic principles of common human decency, that all people with whom we come into contact, be they suspects, victims of crime or just citizens with whom we interact, are treated as we would wish to be treated ourselves. So, in conclusion I would return to the words of the Patten Report, there is, ‘no conflict between human rights and policing. Policing means protecting human rights.’[9]

         

---

[1] ‘A New Beginning: Policing in Northern Ireland. The Report of the Independent Commission on Policing for Northern Ireland’. London HMSO, September 1999, paragraph 4.1 (Patten).

[2] The substance of this paragraph is taken from a paper presented by Ralph Crawshaw and reproduced in ‘Human Rights and the Police: Seminar Proceedings, Strasbourg 6/8 December 1995’. Council of Europe Publishing 1997, p12.

[3] See, for example, Osmanoglu -v- Turkey (24/01/08), Maslova & Nalbandov -v- Russia (24/01/08) and Donmus & Kaplan -v- Turkey (31/01/08). Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights can be accessed via its website: www.echr.coe.int . 

[4] Crawshaw op.cit., p15.

[5] Ibid.

[6] See, for example, ‘US Government said to endorse harsh CIA interrogations’, International Herald Tribune, 03/10/07.

[7] For a comprehensive, convincing and easily readable account of the arguments against using torture see, ‘Defusing the Ticking Bomb Scenario; Why we must say No to torture, always’. Association for the Prevention of Torture, Geneva, 2007. The document can also be accessed at www.apt.ch .

[8] See, for example, ‘Canada Puts US on Prison Torture Watch List’, Globe and Mail, Toronto, 18/01/08.

[9] Patten op. cit.

'Is there a legitimate political space for a critique of human rights?' This is how the book 'State Violence and Human Rights - state officials in the south' edited by my colleague Steffen Jensen and myself begins. What we meant actually was is there space for a critique of the ways human rights are being implemented. We believe there ought to be and this new tactics forum seems to provide evidence that there is a lot of healthy critical reflection going on. This is to be welcomed. My own research amongst law enforcement officials (prison officers in Nigeria and Sierra Leone) suggests that standardised interventions often fail to take seriously the lived realities and structures of law enforcement officers struggling to do a complex task under challenging conditions. Indeed sometimes we are so keen to apply the tools we have at our disposal that we do not take sufficient care to make sure these tools are the most appropriate tools for the task. As someone else has written, if all you have is a hammer everything comes to look like a nail! I fear sometimes that recourse to training  and to manuals can be a case of diagnosing the problem in the light of the solution we have at hand. What happens is institutional constraints, pressures of time, the imperative to act and so on reduce our ability to think imaginatively and to put ourselves in the position of the potential recipients and benificiaries of our interventions.

Critical research on learning and education has demonstrated how difficult it is (especially for Westerners)  to think outside the box of training as a route to change but it is simply no longer true that the problems of law enforcement agencies are problems of lack of knowledge. It is in the realm of practice and to the situated actors who are involved in practice that we must turn.

I have tried to develop these ideas in the light of ethnographic material in the following publications and would welcome ongoing dialogue with practioners involved with the design and implementaion of programmes.

 “Introduction” to State Violence and Human Rights: State Officials in the South with Steffen Jensen.  Routledge, 2009 

“On hangings and the dubious embodiment of statehood in Nigerian prisons” In State Violence and Human Rights: State Officials in the South

“Imaginary reform : changing the postcolonial prison”. In Imaginary Penalities Ed. Pat Carlen. Cullompton: Willan. October 2008

“The political economy of right: exporting penal norms to Africa” Criminal Justice Matters, Politics, Economy and Crime. Nr 70

“Prison Officer Training and Practice in Nigeria: contention, contradiction and re-imagining reform strategies”. Punishment and Society: the international journal of penology, 2006, 9 (3)

"Reforming Nigerian prisons: rehabilitating a “deviant” state" British Journal of Criminology Vol 45 No. 4 July 2005 pp 487-503

 

Alice Verghese

Medical inputs - using medical officers attached to police centres /units  

We have had some startling, positive, responses of training LE through medical officers (MOs) previously targeted and trained by us at IRCT. The LE are trained exclusively by MO's of their vicnity within the "normal" police training programmes , incorporating a few sessions on medical (physical and psychological ) consequences of torture, results of conducting a thorough, proper  medical examination , and writing a comprehensive medical report .  This also helps us to "stick to our role" and develop and use health based preventative mechansims .........

Dear All

Response prompted by various interesting observations to date taking just one of the questions posed - “questions raised and experiences regarding the effectiveness of human rights training”.

I endorse Ralph’s point that there should be no tension between human rights and policing or as it might be framed “human rights based policing” is “best practice policing “. I see Michael Kellett has beaten me to the Chris Patton quote “Policing means protecting human rights”!

Part of the problem is that training happens in the absence of awareness or acceptance of the fact that effective policing is a human right! Without which rights to life, bodily integrity, liberty, property etc are likely to be threatened.

Despite the obvious logic of this the reality remains of a tension between ‘Human rights” and “policing”. It can be traced to Institutional culture, media portrayal (of both human rights and police) etc but in the context of this exchange as Anneke has observed I think it can also be linked to the fact that that a lot of bad training has been done to police officers!

Starting from the fact that human rights training is sometimes a relfex reaction - delivered to police officers without it being established that lack of training is the actual problem that needs to be addressed. If the problem is institutional lack of accountability then no amout of human rights training of front-line police officers is likely to lead to human rights change. There is nothing that undermines the credibility of police human rights training than the knowledge among participants that when the training is over they will continue to get the signal from superiors that the end justifies the means.

A related problem is training for which there is inadequate buy-in by officers due to training not being relevant to the daily reality of those in the room, whether  police managers or those engaged in front-line policing. Human rights training of police is still too often made up of one-size-fits-all power-point presentations of some human rights treaties and mechanisms or fails to address what Evgenchev refers to when he asks "What is the police officer's personal benefit from abidance of human rights and not practicing violence?"  Part of the answer to this question lies in approaching training of police officers as training of people who have specific professional responsibilities - but who are nonetheless themselves bearers of human rights (albeit with certain restrictions that should be clear, justified, proportionate and acknowledged). Training needs to explicily address that being a police officer is only one part of ones identity. Police officers as also men/women, able-bodied/disabled,  members of families, ethnic/religious groups etc. Moreover, the specific nature of their job means that they have certain legitimate specific expectations of the state equipment, training, clarity of powers, effective institutional accountability mechanisms, due process etc.

One guarantee of training failure is when police officers are herded into a training room for some human rights ‘purification’ usually as a result of some external pressure on the police organisation that it be seen to be doing something about a poor human rights record. The trainers among us will all have had the experience at some time where we faced a room of resentful folded arms!

And at the same time the expectations around police training go both ways. Trainers should signal an expectation that trainees will engage in human rights no different than they would training on firearms, driving etc - in terms of professional preparation, engagement etc. This expectation should I think be premised on the fact that human rights based policing is more effective in the sense that that word is used by police officers but also based on the legitimate expectation that when citizens entrust someone with special powers (albeit for their protection) then they should be entitled to expect police officers to engage with (indeed demand) all training necessary to deliver best practice (ie human rights based) policing.

To be effective police training needs to be accompanied by senior police management signal to their organisation of their buy-in to human rights training including active involvement in planning and participation and generally pre-empting stereotypical reaction - in one memorable case I recall someone announcing to sceptical colleagues “I am a human rights officer … with a gun!”. 

Re useful materials: Many years ago I drafted the so-called Discussion Tools for the Council of Europe, officially called the Discussion Tools. A police and human rights trainer's manual : 15 ideas to encourage
police officers to reflect on human rights issues. The tools have been used by many trainers, in different contexts and prove to be a valuable tool when aiming to stimulate genuine reflection about human rights by police officers, instead of them simply memorizing the articles of the Universal Declaration (as in fact is still the way how human rights are being taught to many police worldwide). As has been referred to repeatedly this Dialogue, human rights need to be an integrated component of police training, and in particular need to be related to police practice in order to have any relevance to police in their daily operations. This tool aims to help doing just that, in that it  provides a range of exercises and tools trainers can use to stimulate debate and reflection about human rights and how they relate to police work.

The Discussion tools have been distributed widely and can easily be found on the internet. Also they have been translated into many of the European languages.

Anneke Osse

I'll use a specific example here: Greater publicity can improve the conditions under which policing and security work occur. In the case of eastern Indonesia (Papua), for example, there are strong government-imposed restrictions on access by journalists and humanitarian workers. One NGO  urge other governments "to press Jakarta to invite the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture to visit Papua": 

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2001/07/02/indonesia-violence-and-political-impasse-papua

This did in fact occur:

 http://www.un.or.id/press.asp?Act=1&FileID=20070612-1&lang=en

The Special Rapporteur "heard credible reports of incidents that involve arbitrary detention, torture, harassment through surveillance, interference with the freedom of movement and in defenders’ efforts to monitor and investigate human rights violations. She was also informed of cases where human rights defenders were threatened with prosecution by members of the police and the military. "

One problem here is that military officers who committed serious crimes in East Timor were later promoted:

http://www.etan.org/et2006/april/15/20auspap.htm

In the absence of justice for those crimes, it's hard to see how uniformed personnel can reform their behaviour. But certainly some members of civil society are doing their best to raise awareness of this issue. 

 

 

 

Obviously the issue of accountability needs to be discussed with new police recruits, so that they understand that they are held accountable, why this is so, and also that they are willing to account.

Principles of accountability could also be incorporated in the way training is set up. A simple example is that trainers should be open for scrutiny themselves, for example through setting up an effective and transparent system to evaluate the training sessions as delivered. Also, police training institutions could invite members of civil society, but also parlementarians, judges, prosecutors etc to conduct training sessions so that they can explain thier respective roles in police accountability and also their expectations of the police. Finally police training itself could be open to external scrutiny, for example through establishing (representative) external review boards that regularly (eg annually) review the training curriculum as it is on paper and also as it is conducted in practice.

Training should address the 'often raised dilemma'  of 'security versus human rights' by pointing out that there is no such dilemma as far as police officials are concerned.

Unfortunately even though human rights are protected by law, and any limitations which can be placed on rights and freedoms are set in law, police officials, who are described as law enforcement officials, break the law designed to protect human rights when enforcing other law. This situation exists because a readiness to violate human rights law persists as part of a powerful police sub-culture that regards human rights, which are inalienable and inherent in every human being, as incompatible with the process of policing. Furthermore some human rights violations, for example violations of the right to life and of the absolute prohibition of torture, are very serious crimes and, in committing such acts in order to ‘fight crime’, police are not reducing criminality, they are adding to it. In many instances, the crime of torture will be more serious than the crime being investigated. Those human rights violations that do not amount to criminal acts are enshrined in international law and the laws of states, and encoded as principles of good police practice. It cannot be said that policing that adds to criminality or that violates the professional values of policing is effective. Clearly, breaking the law in order to enforce the law and committing crime in order to fight crime are absurdities.  There is a debate about the nature and extent of the tension that exists between order and liberty, but very little of that debate can be carried through to the debate about policing and human rights, for almost all of the tension has been removed by law. Under law human rights and freedoms are clear, the limitations on those rights and freedoms are clear, and police powers, that mirror those limitations, are clear. Police, whose legitimacy is based on law, must comply with that law absolutely. The areas of policing where that tension has not been removed by law are, largely, those areas where police officials are required, or able, to exercise discretion in the course of their duties, and this issue is connected with the great autonomy of action enjoyed by many police officials. Whilst the extent and nature of discretion exercised by police officials varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, all police officials at different levels in police hierarchies exercise discretion to some extent. This is because it is neither possible nor desirable for all laws to be consistently and rigorously enforced. Questions of resources and deployment of those resources arise, and choices have to be made about which laws are to be enforced and to what extent. Individual police officials, at the lowest levels of the police hierarchy, have it in their power to ignore breaches of law and to decide, correctly or incorrectly, not to enforce the law in respect of specific instances of law-breaking. The exercise of discretion by police officials is connected with their varying degrees of autonomy, and both are an indication of the extent to which much police work is unsupervised and unsupervisable. A great deal of supervision and control within police agencies is supervision and control after the event. Information is fed into the system at ground level, and subordinates are able to control the nature and quality of that information. Supervisors receive edited and partial accounts of incidents dealt with by their subordinates, and of their subordinates' responses to those incidents.  

Where no legal provisions are in place to regulate or define what police action should be in particular circumstances, and where no other rules or guide-lines have been developed, the great legal and humanitarian principles of respect for the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family remain to prompt and inform police action. Indeed these principles, and the specific provisions of human rights law that derive from them, provide a sound basis for codes of behaviour and other texts designed to secure ethical standards in the profession and craft of policing.

At a theoretical level there is no tension between human rights and policing. The fact that such a tension exists in practice is inimical to effective policing and human rights, and it is subversive of the rule of law. A short term ‘victory’ in dealing with a particular manifestation of criminality may be applauded by a public eager to see wrong-doing punished and to live in a secure and peaceful society. However, when such a ‘victory’ is found to have been secured through unlawful and unethical means the applause of the public becomes a little uneasy and less enthusiastic. When unlawful and unethical police practices lead to miscarriages of justice and the punishment of innocent people, as they inevitably do, the applause ceases, public confidence and trust in the police is damaged, people are less inclined to co-operate with and assist police, and courts are reluctant to accept the testimony of police as witnesses. The ‘victory’ has become a defeat.   

(Note the above response is a quote from the book I produced with Tom Williamson and Stuart Cullen - 'Human Rights and Policing')

 

One area that is most often overlooked relative to accountability and professional standards within the police service is the role of professional police associations. Many professions including the legal, medical, teaching, accounting, etc. have professional associations that develop professional and ethical standards for practitioners to abide by. Such standards include training standards that covers not only content but also delivery.

Because members of professional associations are either active, retired or former practitioners, thay are well placed to provide practical rather than theoretical instructions.

Police Associations could play a very important role in promoting accountability by:

1. developing standards to cover a wide range of policng issues both administrative and operational to include recruitment and training, promotion and assignment, incentives and benefits, humna rights standards, and discipline, etc.

2. Once the standards have been developed, the association can then monitor implementation, and at the same time provide tachnical assiatnce to police organizations in need.

The International Association of Chiefs of Police, headquartered in Virginia USA, is a good example of how police associations can enhance police professionalism through the development of training materials, exchange programs, professional conferences and meetings and providing consultancy services to police departments.

The International Police  Assocation in the UK is committed to the principles set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and attempts to promote respect for human rights through its programs.

There are many local and national police associations mainly in the devloped countries but most of these attempt to address issues dealing with the rights of officers.

Human rights organizations should encourage and support the development of local professional police associations and expose members to human rights training so that those trained can better relate to the officers in training.   

 

 

 

Below is a summary of the action research project that Rajasthan Police (India) collaborated with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), USA. I think you will find it interesting and relevant:

Background

In their effort to improve the professionalism, transparency and responsiveness, the Rajasthan Police undertook a comprehensive reform initiative targeted at various aspects of policing in the state. The three-year collaborative project between Rajasthan Police and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), USA was a major initiative. Primarily focused at police station level reforms this project aimed to develop and evaluate a set of police reforms with following objectives:

1. Enhance police performance
2. Improve public opinion
3. Gather objective information about crime rates and police performance.

Interventions

The project started in Sept 2005 with a preliminary survey to identify the problem areas. In depth interviews were conducted with police officers of all ranks, constabulary, members of public including slum dwellers, shop keepers, lawyers, judges, executive magistrates, media etc. The reports of various police commissions as well as available literature on police reforms were extensively consulted. The survey indicated that police is often seen as corrupt, lazy and arbitrary by public. Besides this, the self-perception of police was also found to be negative as they themselves felt overworked, unappreciated and victims of political manipulation. The deliberations following the result of survey led to the identification of the following interventions: 

1.        
In-service
training program: This included
modules on:

a.      
Professional
enhancement of investigating officers with inputs on improving the competence
level and use of scientific techniques.

b.     
Improving public
relations with inputs on ‘soft skills’ such as communication, mediation, stress
management, motivation, team building, leadership, attitudinal change,
nutrition, health etc.

2.        
Community
Observers: Introduced for the first
time, the community observers were local volunteers chosen to sit in the police
station for approximately three hours in the morning and evening (peak hours),
with the sole purpose of observing the activities within the police
station.  They had access to all areas including the lock up. The presence of the observer
would have many positive impacts: increasing public awareness of the roles of
the police, improving police behavior, and encouraging citizens to visit the
police station. 

3.        
Weekly day
off and Duty roster system: Under
this, the entire staff in selected police stations (except the SHO) received
one day off every seven days. In addition, each person was given the opportunity
to perform all the duties at the police station on a roster basis.  The goal was to create a transparent and fair
system of work allocation that would lead to lower stress, more flexibility,
reduced corruption, better informed constabulary and higher overall
productivity.

4.        
Freezing
of transfers: All administrative
transfers in the police stations were prohibited for a period of one and half
years since frequent transfers (due to outside interference) had adverse effect
on professional and family lives of police personnel.

The
choice of the above mentioned reform initiatives was done keeping in mind their
cost-effectiveness, simplicity (as they were to be implemented by SHOs of
various police stations), sustenance and the fact that they were capable of generating
evidence of success. In Feb 2006, the pre-pilot experimentation of these
initiatives was launched in eleven police stations in Jaipur North, Jaipur
East, Jaipur Rural and Sikar districts. After three months of successful
execution, these initiatives were further scaled up to 150 police stations in
eleven districts across Rajasthan: Ajmer, Alwar, Barmer, Chittorgarh,
Pratapgarh, Dholpur, Hanumangarh, Jaipur City East, Kota City, Nagaur, and
Udaipur for a period of one and a half years.

During
the course of this project, around 350 investigation officers (Inspectors, Sub
Inspectors and ASIs) were trained on a weeklong module at Rajasthan Police
Academy Jaipur for improving their skills on investigation. Also, 2000 police
personnel (all ranks) were trained on soft skills, via a three- day module, to
improve public relations with the help of IL&FS (ETS).    

Study Design

The
goal of this project was not only to implement these reforms, but also to
provide scientific and quantitative evidence of their effectiveness.  Therefore within each district, the police
stations and respondents were selected randomly into treatment and control
samples.  Data collection was done
through baseline and end line surveys with continuous monitoring during the
implementation period.  The random
selection of police stations and respondents ensured that the effectiveness of
each of reforms is measured in an unbiased manner.

The
project was completed in June 2008.  The
results from the analysis of the data are now available. The main findings are
summarized below: 

Findings on Crime in Rajasthan,
2008:

·        
Percentage of
households that were victims of crimes vary dramatically across districts:

District  -   % Households victim to at least 1 crime 

• Ajmer  7% 
• Alwar  8% 
• Barmer   3% 
• Chittorgarh  10% 
• Dholpur  18% 
• Hanumangarh  7%
• Jaipur   10%
• Kota  13%
• Nagaur   4%
• Udaipur 5%

Of these crimes,
71% are never reported to the police

·        
In cases when the
crime is reported to the police, an FIR is registered 72% of the time.  Thus 21% of crimes occurring in households
lead to FIRs being registered with the police.

Results
of Project Interventions:
Increasing duration of police postings
improves relations with the public:

• In stations where
  transfers were frozen, 19% fewer respondent reported fearing the police than in
  control stations
• In stations where
  transfers were frozen, 8% fewer police staff members complained of poor
  treatment or disrespect from the public
• In stations where
  transfers were frozen, 30% more crime victims reported to be fully or mostly
  satisfied with the police.

Communications and public relations training
increases satisfaction of crime victims:

• Although on
  average only 27% of victims are satisfied with police investigations, training
  all police station staff more than doubles satisfaction—increasing it to 58%.

Investigation training for officers improves
the quality of crime investigations:

• Crime victims in
  police station where officers received extra training report that police were
  more proactive in investigating—collecting more evidence, interviewing more
  witnesses, and making more arrest.

• In independent
  reviews of case files by retired police officers, cases investigated by
  officers who had received extra training were graded 13% higher in their use of
  scientific investigation techniques.

 

Freezing of transfers reduces staff
grievances:

• Police staff in
  stations where transfers were frozen were more likely to respond positively on
  a variety of questions regarding fairness and transparency in the police.

• Freezing
  transfers made respondents less likely to complain of instability and
  uncertainty in postings.

 

Giving a weekly day off to police staff
increases satisfaction:

• Police staff in
  stations that received a weekly off reported being more satisfied with their
  jobs than in control stations

Rotation of Duties makes constables more
skilled at a variety of tasks:

• When given a test
  of their knowledge of basic police duties and information, constables at
  stations with duty rotation scored higher than those at control police
  stations.

• Constables at
  stations with duty rotation reported having higher levels of expertise in a
  wide range of duties as compared with those in control police stations.

Recommendations:

• National Crime Victimization Survey: A national crime victimization survey carried out
  every two or three years, helping us identify problem areas as well as
  providing data that could be used for assessing effectiveness of reform
  policies. Our survey provides a template for how this can be done
• Freezing of
  Transfers:  Increasing transfer time appears to have significant
  effects on public relations, as well as decreasing staff grievances.  Although this is often presented as a
  politically difficult reform, this project has shown that it is both feasible
  and beneficial and as such is recommended as a permanent goal.
• Training:   Both
  investigation training and public relations training showed positive effects on
  public satisfaction and crime investigations. 
  These interventions are straightforward to scale up and should be
  extended to the remaining Rajasthan Police staff.
• Weekly
  Off/Rotation of Duties:  These interventions showed some effect in
  increasing staff moral and flexibility (in that more staff members were trained
  for each task).  However, these effects
  did not generate significant changes in more traditional indicators of police
  performance. 
• Community
  Observer: The community observer
  intervention had no effect on public perception of the police, potentially due
  to the short duration of the study, or with issues related to
  implementation.  As such it cannot be
  recommended.

 

Alice Verghese

 1. How do law enforcement trainings address the role of official mechanisms of accountability? At the local, national and international levels

Trainers at forums like these could ideally map similar patterns where and how accountability breaks down - in my experience (although this lacks concrete scientific basis  ) weak accountabilty at a local level has a few common features

i. group bonding and language 

ii.  group insularity

iii.high levels of peer pressure to resist whistle blowers

iv.resistance and weak leaderships

There may be other common patterns which may be helpful to identify jointly before addressing  official mechanisms of accountabilty

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alice Verghese

Civil society at national , regional and inyternational  levels has the possibility of documenting common behavioural traits: those working with torture victims can easily recognise torture methods and patterns across the globe. Hence a mapping of uniformity of techniques could infer uniformity of trainihng of police in the use of torture , and perhpas even uniformity of systematic use and common policy . a deeper understanding of this could contribute to accountability at various levels

In Kenya, the Security reforms process has been ongoing coupled with constitutional change. The Civil society in Kenya has been work taking the linkages between police reform at the
peace process, building capacity to engage on National Agenda 4 and Other constitutional reform issues  critical to the National Reconcilation Accord that was mediated by Koffi Annan's AU Eminent Person Panel.

The outcome of
extensive debate among a number of civil society stakeholders has been the
establishment of the Usalama Reform Forum. This is a forum of civil society practitioners who have come
together to promote security sector reform in Kenya and specifically police
reform. The initiative developed out of a conference held as far back as
November 2008 and has since then consolidated into the Usalama Forum.

The Forum
is managed through a steering committee which  includes the Kenya National
Commission on Human Rights; PeaceNet-Kenya, Saferworld, Kenya Muslim Youth
Alliance, Eastern Africa Institute of Security Studies, Eastern Africa Peace
Institute, Africa Research Foundation, Kibera Community Policing Committee,
Socio-Economic Rights Foundation, Amani-Parliamentary Forum, Nairobi Peace
Forum, ChemChemi Ya Ukweli, Africa Policing Civilian Oversight Forum and 
the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. It is structured both at National and
decentralised level . These include:

1)     
Nairobi Usalama Forum: is part of the ongoing dialogue between the Kenya National
Commission on Human Rights and the Police Station Commanders across Nairobi.
The intention is to establish appropriate frameworks for human rights
observance in policing across Nairobi.  The Forum has met once and is
expected to be sustained through regular contacts

2)     
Nyanza Usalama Forum: Like the Nairobi Forum, The intention is to establish appropriate
frameworks for human rights observance in policing across Nyanza. 

3)     
Western Usalama Forum: Like the other forums, this Forum is part of the ongoing dialogue
between the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights and the Police Station
Commanders across Western province. The intention is to establish appropriate
frameworks for human rights observance in policing across Western Province.

4)     
North Rift Usalama Forum: This forum brings together the KNCHR, Peace Net-Kenya and other CSO
actors to address conclusively all the security issues across the North
Rift.  The Forum has established an implementation strategy. 

5)     
Northern Kenya Usalama
Forum: This forum brings together the KNCHR, Peace Net-Kenya and other CSO
actors to address conclusively all the security issues across the North
Rift.  The Forum has established an implementation strategy. 

 

Usalama has also managed to establish good relations with both the
Administra tion Police and the Kenya Police. The strategy of
the Forum is focussed on three themes, legislative reform, institutional
development and police accountability.  In the latter theme we are among
others seeking ways to operationalise the common standards for policing along
the concept ideas we discussed previously. The Forum has also made extensive
input into the Police Reform Task Team.

Over the next  few weeks we plan to host a
number of public forums to which we will invite you.We looking forward to partnership to help us run the processes.

Alice Verghese

 leadership and lines of responsibility

In "democratic" countries where "emergency regulations"  are imposed for a host of reasons  (fighting terrorism is a popular one ) the question of leadership , with clear lines of responsibility is often lacking.  For example, in the Philippines where the IRCT  along with member centres have been workng for over 10 years have experienced New Emergency Regulations (ER, or Emergency Miscellaneous Provisions and PowersRegulations, EMPPR) were imposed on 14 August 2005 The regulation is loosely worded. Notably the legislation strengthens impunity allowing prosecution exemptions for members of the security forces deemed to be acting in “good faith.”(Regulation 19)  

 Not only police officers and soldiers, but also so-called “public officers” and those specifically authorized by the President may make arrests under the ER. In addition, the ER allow joint operations of arrest between the army and the police without clarifying the respective responsibilities of these two forces.  Contrary to sections 24 to 26 of the Evidence Ordinance, under the ER, confessions tosenior police officers may also be used as evidence in court. Another worrying issue is the question of the leadership during "emergency"  According to the Philippine Constitution the civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. However,  Armed Forces Philippines (AFP)  maintains that it  “takes the leading role and the Police the supporting role. This vagueness further contributes to creating a climate of impunity since responsibilities are not clearly identified. Although I agree with a lot that has been said about community policing, eventually, it is worth mentioning that the army in the Philippines relies upon civilians for fighting terrorism,  by using the Citizens Armed Forces Georgraphic Units (CAFGU) further blurring the line of responsibilities.  Such units are frequently accused of abuses, victims pointing out to the fact that CAFGUs are not adequately trained whereas they are armed. AFP provides them with 48 hours training on international humanitarian law. 

I raise this as I dont believe this is peculiar to Philippines but may resonate with others in other parts of the world. The clear lines of responsibilities of the police distinguished from and army /miilitary  under "ordinary or " emergency " situations and drawn to the notice of the public is crucial for accountabilty.

 

Col. Cecil B. Griffiths, (Liberia) Founder and President of the Liberia National Law Enforcement Association (LINLEA).

In many countries, police commissions or councils have been established to provide some form of accountability to police functions. In Liberia, discussions are ongoing regarding setting up of an oversight mechanism for the police to address accountability. Are there best practices when it comes to the use of police commissions to address accountability issues within the police?

 Training definately can play a significant role in providing the knowledge, skills and awareness for policed officers in preventing torture. However, some training programs may be sub-standard. Even when trainings are well tailored, we cannot be sure that police officers will not disregard what they have been taught..

Many of my colleagues have mentioned the importance of supervision in following up on officers conduct and behavior.  But we have seen situations in which supervisors themselves are not qualified to lead. In many police services, promotions may not be based on merit.

When torture and other forms of police abuses are not sanctioned by the police administration, such misconduct can be addressed by effective supervision, training and effective policy guidelines which are implemented.  However, when torture is sanctioned by police executives, then it becomes difficult to handle.

 Have police commissions been able to address the issue of  political appolintments of police executives who must dance to the tune of the president rather than abide by the rule of law, a sitauaion which can promote torture? 

 

Evgeni Genchev

In our experience, a real useful access, we have had only when there were truly motivated officers and structures for reforms concerning policing and human rights. Also when there was an external pressure for human rights reforms in the police it helped very much. Such was the accession process to EU which Bulgaria has undergone. Now the priorities of the EU have changed, they are no more concerned with human rights, but in the effectiveness of the police work, so working with the police on human rights issues has become difficult.

Evgeni Genchev We have always put as an important issue in our meetings and trainings of the police officers in human rights the question: "What is the police officer's personal benefit from abidance of human rights and not practicing violence?"  The answer is that no normal human being wants to feel guilty or a perpetrator and practicing violence is dehumanizing and demoralizing for the police officer himself. It's against his personal dignity. This has always had a good resonance with the police officers. Also practicing violence hinders the professional police work, because in court no testimonies taken with violence would go. Also there is real risk for a police officer to be dismissed and even been brought to trial for a complaint of violence.

Evgeni Genchev

In Bulgaria the police has a totalitarian tradition of being a repressive instrument. So arbitrarity has been the law for the police officers (than called militionairs). So human rights is something foreign to the police culture and only the cases when policemen get in trouble because of violating human rights makes them being thoughtfull about it. In the trainings, I am not sure this is the accurate word, because we do seminars more to inform and warn, we explain them that violations of human rights will not be supported by their superiors when they become disclosed. So to violate human rights is a personal decision and responsability and a violation of the laws. Also we tend to include in the seminars high ranking officers to support our statements.

Walter Suntinger

 The following remarks are mainly based on my experience as an external human rights trainer/consultant within the Austrian police system. 

One of the main challenges that I see concern the appropriate integration of  (human rights) training within police organizational structures in order for it to be sustainable. 

 “Forget what you have learned in police school, what policing really is you will learn here”. This is a standard phrase that young recruits hear when they join the practical police work in Austria (and probably in most countries) 

This sentence expresses very well the very real dilemma; and I would like to raise the following points:

• It is relevant to stress that there is a difference between theoretical knowledge (acquired in school and trainings) and practical knowledge (acquired in practical work). Practical knowledge is usually the more relevant one.

• This is particularly pertinent also for human rights training content  as the normative human rights principles are often questioned by police practitioners as theoretical, going against practical considerations. ("we do not have time to think so much, we have to act on the spot").
• Using sociological insight from the work of Pierre Bourdieu, it is also  relevant to remember that recruits have to cope with the particular behavioural/cognitive structures in the practical police field (having “magnetic force” on new members) and will have to adapt their "habitus" accordingly. This might mean that if a human rights approach/habitus has been acquired in police training it might lead to frictions with the more "classical habitus" of older colleagues without human rights trainings.
• I have found the work of Chan “Fair Cop: learning the art of policing" very helpful in this regard ( for a book review see http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-139784498/fair-cop-learning-art.html)

These considerations should have consequences for the concrete training set-up which should be linked to organizational concerns with a view to creating an environment that is support of human rights (put differently: where a human rights habitus can be developed and maintained)

 In the Austrian police training context  we are currently considering the following points in order to make human rights training more sustainable:

• Include within the initial training elements which make recruits aware of the forces of they will be exposed to when they the practical police field.
• Make these mechanisms which might lead to a tensions with upholding human rights the object of systematic reflection in order to support a human rights habitus 
• Strengthen the way police recruits are accompanied when entering the practical police work.

 

Over the years Amnesty International has built  up considerable experience in working with police officers and on human rights issues. Here are some of our main lessons learnt:

If you intend to work on policing issues, and maybe explore opportunities to engage with the police, it is critical to have a sound understanding of what policing is all about. We noticed all too often that there are misjudgments and stereotypical ideas about the police (and for the record, also within the police about human rights advocates). These are not helpful. For enhancing an understanding of policing Amnesty International's Dutch section published (in 2006) ' Understanding policing, a  resource for human rights advocates'. The book is available in Englsih, Russian, Spanish, Brazilian Portuguese and Indonesian.  The full texts (including those of the translated versions) can be downloaded from our website at www.amnesty.nl/policeandhumanrights

A related lesson learnt is that work on policing should start with a thorough analysis of the situation  addressed. I know this sounds somewhat simple, but all too often we found that human rights groups, including ourselves!, unfortunately jump into working on policing without proper preparation. Related to this is that we learnt, that it is important to institutionalize work on policing and try to move beyond work that stems from personal relations and contacts with individual police officers. Though personal relations and 'one off'  event's like for example a lecture on human rights at the police academy, can certainly be a good starting point it is worth aiming to develop more long term relations, as well as a long term strategy specif\ying aims and objectives. Such a strategy turned out to be also helpful in preventing being used for internal police politics. A tool for making a contextual analysis as well as a tool for developing a strategy can both be found in Understanding Policing, as well as as a separate download on the website referred to above.

Finally we learnt about the importance of communication with the human rights community, as there may be (fellow) human rights NGOs raising their eyebrows when learning that one of them is considering engaging with the police. The key word is, as so often, transparency. By doing so one can explain what are the reasons for engaging with the police and what are the means adopted. Also, a joint strategy can be developed (jointly with the human rights community) where some NGOs engage whereas others keep more distance.

Elsewhere in this On line Dialogue  reference was made to the Council of Europe Police and Human Rights Program. A number of years ago there was an interesting initiative by this program in cooperation with police from around the Council of Europe, working together in what then was called the European Platform on Police and Human Rights (in which also Amnesty International then participated).  Though the platform no longer exists, it did publish a number of relevant publications. Worth mentioning in particular are " Police and NGOs, why they can and should work together"  and " Police have rights too!". The first gives a number of practical guidelines for both police and human rights advocates when considering engaging. The second proves to be a valuable tool to open the door towards police officers, for example in a training situations, as it clearly underlines that human rights are not just for ' them and not for us' but are in fact those rights to which every human being is entitled, including police officers. 

Unfortunately the publications  of the Council of Europe cannot (easily) be found on the internet. However, if you contact us we can arrange for you to get a copy (by e-mail), or we can provide New Tactics with the PDFs so that they can forward them.

On our wesbite www.amnesty.nl/policeandhumanrights many relevant links and resources can be found including a range of documents published by Amnesty International over the years that are useful  resource information for those stepping into the work on policing, including:

• 10 Basic Human Rights Standards for Law Enforcement Officials
  (1998). AI Index: POL 30/004/1998.
• A 12-Point Guide for Good Practice in the Training and Education
  for Human Rights of Government Officials (1998). AI Index: ACT 30/001/1998.
• Guns and
  policing. Standards to prevent misuse (2004). AI Index: ACT 30/001/2004.
• Policing to
  protect human rights: A survey of police practices in countries of the Southern
  African Development Community, 1997-2002 (2002). AI Index: AFR 03/004/2002.
• Rights at
  risk: Amnesty International's concerns regarding security legislation and law
  enforcement measures. (2002). AI Index: ACT 30/001/2002.

I hope these resources are useful. 

Anneke Osse

Ibrahim Hassan Omar Elghazawi,PhD
Humphrey Fellow
Human Rights Center
University of Minnesota:

These two topics are of great significance, in fact they both raise several issues, and I would love to share them with you to have your input :

First: Concerns of law enforcement officers:

• Are law enforcement officers entitled, on equal basis with other public employees, to get fully paid holidays and vacations?
• How would working more than 8 hours a day affect performance nature?
• How far a community can expect LEOs effective role when they themselves are under heavy stress form their work place?
• Will the community witness some difference when law enforcement officers concerns are efficiently addressed?
• How can poor working conditions reflect on the personal line of performance?

Second:Professional Ethics of law enforcement officers:
Every profession has an ethical structure of practice, that ethical standard is sometimes holding a particular job occupant in a higher level of responsibility than individuals in other profession are. Within law enforcement setting this ethical structure is largely true in terms of police work…in that context several questions are raised:

• Are LEOs  held in a higher level of responsibility and accountability than other public employees in the community? And why?
• If the answer is “yes” would that entail additional benefits to LEOs to justify their being held in higher level of accountability?
• What would happen if legal obligations contradict ethical commitments of LEOs?
• Will the ethical structure for LEOs  be a guarantee to  keeping the police role sticking to the community interests ?
• Is the ethical structure for LEOs considered part of the community ethical entity ? or is it rather part  of that one of official state and ruling system?
• What difference would it make for the police ethics to be community –based or Government-based?

 

I think the issue of human rights of police officers is a crucial one. All too often (especially) rank and file officers find themselves more or less at the mercy of their superiors. This is almost all-encompassing: when they can take leave (if at all), transfers to the other side of the country, promotion possibilities, equipment  and also available training opportunities, and many other issues.

In quite a few countries these issues are directly related to (internal) corruption. Police have to pay to be able to enter the force, to enter training and then again to enter any kind of follow up training or training for particular jobs. 'Entrance fees' paid can be as high as 3000 US dollars. Where does the money go to? Quite often this is a public secret: everyone knows what are the more lucrative positions within the force. Yet what can be done to counter this phenomenon?

In my opinion some of the better work on police traumatic exposure looks at resilience and coping strategies. Dr Merle Friedman proposes that we talk about "negative resilience", a coping style based on avoidance, denial, numbing, dissociation and often supported by substance abuse. The word resilience is important since Dr Friedman suggests that many police officers survive multple exposures in the line of duty over many years using this approach. The word negative is appropriate because it is a very limited form of resilience that comes at a cost. The primary cost is the loss of a full range of human emotion and with it the potential damage to relationships, passion for life, caring about other people and the work, and so forth. So many police officers start out in their careers with a vision of themselves protecting the innocent and building safer societies, and then over time this vision gets eroded by the realities of the work. And of course, there is very thin line between just doing the job because it's your work and corruption.

The longer term cost is that ultimately Dr Friedman argues that negative resilience crumbles leaving the officer without adequate internal resources to resolve experiences of trauma and loss.

A broader understanding of the impact of repeated exposure to life threatening events helps us draw together issues of poor performance, burn out, work related PTSD, corruption, substance abuse, and breakdowns in personal and professional relationships - all problems that plague policing agencies across the world.

 We need to  be training new police officers in healthy coping and positive resilience. An example is training officers how to consciously strengthen their psychological defenses for situations in which they are in danger or dealing with aggressive offenders (something that most police officers in my experience do naturally) and then consciously opening their defenses again when they are in safe places, having an important conversation with a collegue or at home with partners and children (something that in my experience many police officers are less able to do).

 'The human rights of police' is a very important subject and I prepared a paper on this which might be useful. It's 9 pages long and (because of its length) I may be committing a very serious breach of etiquette for this sort of exercise by offering it here - Nancy please tell me if that is the case and I'll apologise profusely and smite my breast in contrition.

THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF POLICE UNDER THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS 

Policing is an exacting vocation – emotionally, intellectually and physically. It can be dangerous and uncomfortable. Whilst due regard for the human rights of police cannot remove all of the dangers and discomforts, it can remove some and it can alleviate others. It is important to attend to the human rights of police in order to promote the well being of police, and in order to reinforce a culture supportive of human rights within police agencies. The relationship between human rights and policing is needlessly contentious and incongruous, and it is helpful to consider the human rights of police within the context of this broader relationship.

 The relationship between human rights and policing   

This relationship can be usefully regarded as having four components: respect, protect, investigate, and entitlement.

 
Respect
 
Police are required to respect human rights in the exercise of their powers. This aspect of the relationship is the most commonly addressed, because one of the primary purposes of human rights is to protect people from abuse of power by the state. Human rights limit police powers, exercised on behalf of the state, to use force, to deprive people of their liberty, and to carry out search and surveillance activities or operations. They require humane treatment of detainees. Equally, the lawful and reasonable exercise of police powers may legitimately limit human rights. Most of the jurisprudence of human rights institutions concerning police acts or omissions arises from this aspect of the relationship.
 
Protect 
Police are expected to protect human rights in the performance of their functions. For example in their crime prevention task police endeavour to prevent murder and other unlawful killings. Failure to do so can, in certain circumstances, mean that the right to life has been violated.(1) In their investigative function police are required to gather evidence and present it to courts in order that guilt or innocence may be decided. When these processes are carried out lawfully the right to a fair trial is reinforced. That right is subverted through the presentation of false evidence, or evidence unlawfully or unfairly obtained.(2) When police maintain or restore order they contribute to the protection of all human rights, for when social order breaks down all human rights are vulnerable.
 
Investigate 

Police have a duty to investigate human rights violations because, in the first instance, some violations, such as violations of the right to life and of the prohibition of torture, are very serious crimes. Furthermore, human rights instruments (3) and the jurisprudence of human rights institutions (4) require that alleged or suspected violations of human rights should be investigated. Whilst it has not been specified that police should carry out these investigations, indeed in some cases it would not be appropriate for them to do so, in many cases it is inevitable that police will investigate. Prompt, impartial and effective investigation of human rights abuse reinforces other measures to ensure respect for and protection of human rights, including human rights of police.

 

These three aspects of the relationship between human rights and policing are often contested by some police officials. In effect they argue that they are justified in violating human rights in order to deliver effective policing. The claim that police officials, law enforcement officials, need to break the law in order to enforce the law is incongruous. In fact it is absurd and it is inimical to human rights and subversive of the rule of law.

 Entitlement 

Every police official is entitled, as is every other person, to human rights. Furthermore police officials, as members of a particular type of occupational group, have specific needs and entitlements in relation to human rights. These points are developed in the next section. 

 

The human rights of police officials

 The universality of human rights and the obligations on states to secure human rights 

Human rights derive from the inherent dignity and worth of the human person and they are universal, indivisible and interdependent. These characteristics of human rights indicate their inclusivity; they apply to all members of the human family. Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone is entitled to all of the rights and freedoms set forth in the Declaration without distinction of any kind such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

 

The obligation to secure human rights rests upon states. All member states of the United Nations are bound under the Charter of the United Nations to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.(5) States are also bound, under the various human rights treaties to which they are parties, to ensure respect for and protection of the rights of individuals within their jurisdiction according to the terms of those treaties. For example, article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights requires High Contracting parties to secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section 1 of the Convention. Article 14 of the Convention stipulates that the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in the Convention shall be secured without discrimination. It then lists a number of grounds similar to those set out in article 2 of the Universal Declaration. Article 13 of the Convention requires that everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in the Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national tribunal notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.(6)

 

In sum, everyone is entitled to human rights, including police officials. States are required to secure those rights to all within their jurisdiction without discrimination and, when they fail to do so, they have to provide an effective remedy for the violation. When they fail to do that, providing certain other conditions are fulfilled, an individual can have recourse to an international institution, for example the European Court of Human Rights, to secure redress.

 Although it is not a common occurrence, police officials have had recourse to international institutions in order to secure their rights. For example, in Halford v. the United Kingdom, (7) the applicant, a senior police official, claimed that calls made from her home and her office telephones were intercepted for the purposes of obtaining information to use against her in proceedings she was bringing at an Industrial Tribunal. She had instituted those proceedings alleging that she had been discriminated against on grounds of sex. The European Court of Human Rights concluded that the conversations held by Ms Halford on her office telephones fell within the scope of the notions of "private life" and "correspondence". The Court found that here had been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention, which protects the right to private and family life, in relation to the interception of calls made on the applicant's office telephones, but felt that there was insufficient evidence to suggest that calls made from her home telephone were being intercepted.  

In Munoz Hermoza v. Peru (8) the author of the communication was an ex-sergeant of the Guardia Civil (police). He alleged that he had been temporarily suspended from the Guardia Civil on 25 September 1978 on false accusations of having insulted a superior but, when he was brought before a judge on 28 September 1978 on that charge, he was immediately released for lack of evidence. Nevertheless, by administrative decision dated 30 January 1984, he was discharged from service. The author claimed that after having served in the Guardia Civil for over 20 years he had been arbitrarily deprived of his livelihood and of his acquired rights, including accrued retirement rights, thus leaving him in a state of destitution, particularly considering that he had eight children to feed and clothe. He then spent 10 years going through numerous and diverse domestic administrative and judicial instances seeking reinstatement in the Guardia Civil, without success.

 

In considering the merits of this case, the Human Rights Committee noted that the concept of a fair hearing, as set out in article 14.1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, necessarily entails that justice be rendered without undue delay. It reviewed the multifarious domestic procedures followed by the author, observing in particular that an administrative review kept pending for seven years constituted an unreasonable delay, and concluded that such a seemingly endless sequence of instances and the repeated failure to implement decisions were incompatible with the principle of a fair hearing.

The Committee was of the view that the events of this case disclosed a violation of article 14, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The State party was under an obligation, in accordance with the provisions of article 2 of the Covenant, to take effective measures to remedy the violations suffered by Rubén Toribio Muñoz Hermoza, including payment of adequate compensation for the loss suffered.

The specific nature of the entitlement of police to human rights  

It is a fundamental principle of human rights protection that human rights apply equally to all members of the human family, and this principle should not be lost in distinguishing between the differing needs and entitlements of various social groups. However, it is recognised that special provisions have to be made to secure the human rights of vulnerable categories of people, for example women and children.(9) Moreover, it is evident that some groups, for example occupational groups, will regard some human rights as more important than others; that different conditions need to be fulfilled in order to secure the human rights of different groups; and that states have differing types of obligations to secure rights for the various groups. For example it is to be expected that the right to freedom of opinion and expression (10) will be regarded as extremely important by journalists, whereas police officials may consider that the right to equal access to public service (11) has great importance because unfair criteria for appointments to public service may have prevented them from following their chosen profession.

 

Regarding the conditions that need to be fulfilled to secure human rights for different occupational groups, and differing obligations on states in this respect, it is instructive to consider the requirement on states to protect the right to life. The conditions to be fulfilled in order to protect the right to life of a journalist, or a delegate of the International Committee of the Red Cross, working in a war zone, are different to those to be fulfilled in order to protect the right to life of a police official. They each require information and skills, hence training and briefing, and they each require equipment. However, because the nature of their tasks and the conditions under which they carry them out differ, their training needs and equipment differ. Furthermore, as police officials are state officials there is a direct obligation on the state to train and equip them, in fact the obligation is wider than that, whereas the state has no such direct obligation in relation to the journalist and the ICRC delegate.

 

In order to illustrate the nature and extent of the obligation on the state to protect the right to life of police, and how it may happen that a state fails to meet this obligation, I would like to recall a situation that arose during a human rights programme for police I was conducting in a Member State of the Council of Europe for the Council. During a discussion on the right to life the participants explained that a large number of police officials had been killed in the course of their duties during the previous year. They gave a figure for police deaths that seemed excessively high, even though the incidence of violent crime in that country was also high. In spite of the large number of murders of police, the participants claimed that not one of the incidents had been analysed with a view to taking preventive and protective action in the future. Hence no changes had been made in selecting, training, equipping, briefing and deploying police officials in response to the killings. If their account was accurate then, clearly, there had been a gross failure on the part of the police leadership and the government, and the state had not met its obligation to protect the right to life of its police officials.(12)

 

International standards for police on equipment, including protective equipment, and on selection, training, and counselling, are set out in the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. (13) These principles express professional, practical standards on the use of force and firearms by police, and on the personal safety of police officials. Whilst not legally binding, they indicate some of the conditions that need to be fulfilled by states in order that they may meet their treaty obligations to protect the right to life of all those involved, including police, in operations where force or firearms may be used by police.

 It is not my purpose in this paper to examine the full range of human rights from the point of view of police entitlements, but some of the economic social and cultural rights clearly have great significance for police. For example, the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring an existence worthy of human dignity (14) is important for police officials everywhere, and for the communities they serve. Governments need to ensure that police pay and conditions of service are sufficient to maintain the human dignity of police officials, and to provide a bulwark against corruption.  
The onus on governments in this respect is particularly strong because human rights treaties allow for the imposition of lawful restrictions on members of armed forces and of the police in the exercise of the right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of their interests. (15) 

The rights of police in times of armed conflict

 

Police officials are generally insufficiently aware of the principles and provisions of international humanitarian law, or the law of armed conflict, that are relevant to police officials and police operations in times of armed conflict. The purposes of this branch of public international law are to regulate the conduct of hostilities and to protect victims of armed conflicts. International humanitarian law imposes obligations on parties to armed conflicts, and comes into force only when armed conflict occurs. Its provisions are not generally expressed as rights, but the obligations they impose on parties to armed conflicts can provide forms of protection to police officials in ways similar to some human rights.

 International humanitarian law consists of two sets of treaty law ("Hague Law" and "Geneva Law") plus a number of customary rules. The two strands of treaty law are distinguished in that Hague Law governs the conduct of hostilities - the permissible means and methods of warfare, whereas Geneva Law is concerned with the protection of victims of war. An example of Hague Law is the 1907 Hague Convention lV Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land. Since they first entered into force many of the Hague Regulations have been developed or superseded by the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. In fact the distinction between the two sets of treaty law is not now quite so marked, as they are merging to some extent through these later treaty provisions. Geneva Law is largely contained in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949. These treaties make provision for combatants who become victims of war - either as sick, wounded or shipwrecked casualties, or prisoners of war (in the first, second and third Conventions), and for the protection of civilians in time of war (in the very long and detailed fourth Convention). Apart from article 3 Common to all four Conventions, all of the Conventions’ provisions concern the protection of victims of international armed conflicts. In 1977 two Protocols Additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions were adopted. The first Protocol, relating to international armed conflicts, up-dates and elaborates existing rules of combat as well as rules for the protection of war victims, bringing about the partial fusion of "Hague” and "Geneva" law referred to above. The second Protocol supplements the provisions of article 3 Common to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which contains a number of obligations binding on the parties to non-international armed conflicts.  

The relationship between police and international humanitarian law can be characterised in much the same terms as those used in characterising the relationship between police and human rights - police officials are required to comply with its provisions, and to protect victims of armed conflict and the civilian population. They may be called upon to investigate crimes arising out of armed conflict; (16) and they can benefit from various forms of protection available under international humanitarian law.

 

The provisions of international humanitarian law relevant to police and police operations in times of conflict are many and detailed. My purpose in raising this matter in this context is simply to point out that there are benefits arising for police officials when this branch of law is complied with, just as there are when human rights law is complied with. For example, in an international armed conflict, some members of armed law enforcement agencies that have been incorporated into the armed forces of a party to a conflict have combatant status.(17) This means that they have some forms of protection on the battlefield, and are entitled to treatment as prisoners of war in the event of capture by the adverse party. However, the majority of police, as members of civilian police agencies, would have civilian and not combatant status in the event of such a conflict. This means that they would be entitled to the protection afforded to the civilian population set out in 1949 Geneva Convention lV and 1977 Additional Protocol l.  

 

1949 Geneva Convention lV relating to the protection of civilians requires any civilian, military, police or other authorities who in time of war assume responsibilities in respect of protected persons, to possess the text of the Convention and be specially instructed as to its provisions.(18) 1977 Geneva Protocol 1 requires any military or civilian authorities who, in time of armed conflict, assume responsibilities in respect of the application of the Conventions and the Protocol, to be fully acquainted with the text thereof.(19) Perhaps these obligations on High Contracting Parties could also be regarded as rights of police officials.

 

Concluding remarks

 The focus of this conference on the human rights of police officials it to be welcomed. The human rights of police are an extremely important aspect of the relationship between human rights and policing. Focusing on this aspect should enable the relationship to develop into one that is less contentious and incongruous.

 

Notes and References

 

1. See, for example, Osman v. the United Kingdom (judgement of 28 October 1998, Reports of Judgements and Decisions 1998‑VIII) in which the European Court of Human Rights observed that article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights may imply, in certain well-defined circumstances, a positive obligation on the authorities to take preventive operational measures to protect an individual whose life is at risk from the criminal acts of another individual.

 2. See, for example, Barbera, Messegue and Jabardo v. Spain, judgement of  6 December 1988, Series A no 146, in which the European Court of Human Rights had reservations about some crucial aspects of the way in which the evidence had been taken and the conduct of the trial proceedings, including the accuseds’ confessions. In this respect, the Court observed that when they made their confessions to the police, they had already been charged but did not have the assistance of a lawyer, although they did not appear to have waived their right to one. Accordingly these confessions, which had been obtained during a long period of custody in which they were held incommunicado, gave rise to reservations on the part of the Court. The Court concluded that the proceedings in question, taken as a whole, did not satisfy the requirements of a fair and public hearing, and that there had been a violation of article 6. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 3. See, for example, article12 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment which requires that each state party shall ensure that its competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed in any territory under its jurisdiction. 4. See, for example, McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgement of 22 September 1995, Series A no. 324, in which the European Court of Human Rights held that there should be some form of effective official investigation when individuals have been killed as a result of the use of force by the state.  

5. Article 55 (c).

 6. Article 2.1 and 2. 3 (a) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights embodies similar provisions.  7. Judgement of 25 June 1997, Reports of Judgements and Decisions 1997-III. 8. Communication No. 203/1986: Peru 17/11/88.</DIV> CCPR/C/34/D/203/1986. <DIV ALIGN=center>9. See, for example, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women adopted by UN General Assembly resolution 34/180 of 18 December 1979; and the Convention on the Rights of the Child adopted by UN General Assembly resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989. 10. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 11. Article 21.2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  

12. I am aware that the Council of Europe attempted to arrange for some technical assistance from a police agency of another Member State in order to provide a proper response to this situation but do not know if, or how, it was resolved.

 13. Adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Havana, 27 August – 7 September 1990.  See also the European Code of Police Ethics (Recommendation [2001] 10 adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 10 September 2001).   14. Article 23.3, Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 7 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. 

15. See, for example, articles 22 and 11 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the European Convention on Human Rights respectively.

 16. The requirement for police officials to investigate such crimes may arise in a number of ways. For example, each of the Geneva Conventions obliges high contracting parties to provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing or ordering to be committed grave breaches of the Conventions. They are also required to search for such persons and bring them, regardless of nationality, before their own courts or hand them over for trial to another high contracting party concerned. (Articles 49, 50, 129 and 146 of the four Conventions respectively). See also article 85 of 1977 Geneva Protocol l. Grave breaches are acts such as wilful killing and torture or inhumane treatment when committed against those protected by the Conventions. Police could be involved in various stages of the processes required by these provisions, including investigations. 

Furthermore, in 1988 the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court adopted the Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court. This Court has jurisdiction with respect to the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression. The Statue entered into force on 1 July 2002, and the Chief Prosecutor took office in 16 June 2003. When the Court begins its operations, police agencies in different countries will be involved in investigating crimes subject to the jurisdiction of the Court.

 17. Article 43. 3 1977 Geneva Protocol l. 18. Article 144. 19. Article 83.2   

Acknowledgement

 I would like to thank Professor Kevin Boyle of the University of Essex for his comments on the first draft of this paper.     

In many developed countries, police officers have the right to join police associations or unions. But in Africa and other developing countries police officers in active service are barred form becoming members of police associations. In Africa two countries stand out in respecting the rights of officers to associate: South Africa, which allows police officers to join the trade unions, and Liberia, which also allows law enforcmenet officers to join the law enforecment association. Ghana and other countries only allow for retired officers to join the police association.

My question is why are some governments hesitant in allowing police officers in active service in becoming members of a police association? Is that not a violation of the officers rights? Can any one give reasons for this?  

 

During the year 2008, our Center had provided training on the international and national laws against torture and its effects in the eight major regional cities of the country. And during the training the trainees, specially in the regional cities had participated actively and raised questions and discussed very carefully. Most of them were not well aware of the international definition of torture that the Federal Government of Government of Ethiopia had signed. After the end of the training almost 90% percent of the trainees had filled in the evaluation questionnaire that they had found the training as important. Even three of the prison institutions in the regional states had invited us to visit their prison and talk with the prison inmates. And this was very amazing by our Center and important. Thus, concerns of the law enforcement bodies are very important.     

Tekeste Ayalew

Senior Program Officer

Rehabilitation Center for Victims of Torture in Ethiopia (RCVTE)

Over the years the Association for the Prevention fo Torture (APT) has been involved in the training of a range of public officials who come into direct contact with persons deprived of their liberty. These have included police, prison staff, judges and prosecutors. One of the questions we repeatedly ask ourself is are we making a difference and, if so, how much of one? When the New Tactics team were drawing up the list of topics for this on-line dialogue the issue of impact of human rights education and training initiatives was one we at the APT were very keen to explore and discuss with others. Thus, I would be extremely interested to learn more about the experiences of our colleagues in this respect. Many thanks!    

In fact it could be hard to gauge to which extent a training in human rights was a success, I have been working in training field in that subject for years both in Egypt and African countries as part of international activities in the field of Human Rights, and I can be sure about some points:

1. Training on Human Rights subjects can be more effective when conducted - as strategic obligation- within a decision -making level of officials, while training schemes should focus on individual violations while framing a program to a large-base personnel.
2. Training shouldn’t focus on theoretical international standards of human rights, but better have them integrated in a more practical models of human rights plans.
3. Training can be more effective when addressing human rights from realistic stance and not from "above View"  level , it means that  being idealist wouldn't do any good, but being accountable is more real.
4. In many cases, I had an impression of great value added to law enforcement agents after training was over, and that can be detected easily through the course delivery line and full involvement in talk and discusion.
5. Still the need does exist widely to pump more and disseminate training of human rights to wider groups of decision makers and med-level officials, where training can be more productive and reflective on policy-reviewing levels, and effective in bringing about tangible changes to current realities.

Ibrahim Hassan Elghazawi,PhD Humphrey Fellow Human Rights Center School of law University of Minnesota 

Because police officers are trained and equipped to use weapons, they are subject to a culture which glorifies violence. In fact, while it may be expedient, violence is expensive and relatively ineffective in the long term. The proposed program exalts officers who use non-violent methods to de-escalate and defuse tense situations without threat or force. Our goal is to build a police culture that realistically views violence as a last ditch alternative which can be prevented by skilled officers, and to enable officers to learn the skills of non-violence.

We don't come in as outside experts, telling police officers how to do their job. Every experienced officer has used non-violent techniques. We encourage them to "learn by teaching," describing their experiences in a video interview. We then edit and distribute those videos, elevating successful uses of non-violent strategies and techniques. Over time, we continue to check back with reinforcements, interwoven with interviews from other police forces.

Training includes four stages:

1. Introduction of concepts and distribution of pamphlet;
2. Video recorded individual interviews;
3. Distribution of departmental DVD;
4. Distribution of “best of” DVDs.

 

Evgeni Genchev

As a result of our work with the police on human rights, there were some new regulations about detainment by the police. There is an obligatory set of documents to fill in. Time of beggining of police detention is to be the moment of the detention and not the moment the person is brought to the police station. Also the detaned person wish or refusal for lawyer, medical care and phone call is to be documented. Established were permanent comissions for human rights in the police on central and regional levels. Human rights issues were included in the regular continuing edication of the policemen.

All this hasn't erradicated police violations of human rights, but is a clear signal for the direction for the police development.

Showing police candidates videos of officers on trial for human rights violations in order to dissuade them from misconduct
Dr. Biçak compiled footage of the prosecutions of police officers charged with violating human rights into a 90-minute video. Candidates at the police academy are shown the tape, in conjunction with a human rights course, to combat misconceptions about human rights, remind them that police officers can and will be prosecuted for misconduct, encourage empathy for the accused and remind them of the need to protect their human rights. Dr. Biçak also gives the recruits a questionnaire at the beginning and end of their training to track changes in their attitudes toward human rights. While most begin the course believing that human rights are an impediment to police work and that the concept did not encompass the protection of their own rights, the questionnaire showed that most developed a more open mind by the end of their training. This tactic has been implemented during pre-service, second-level training in the Faculty of Security Sciences for those who will become high-ranking policemen.

Professor Dr. Vahit Biçak, www.vahitbicak.com

Being based in Geneva we are ideally placed to follow the various sessions of the UN treaty bodies and only today the UN Committee against Torture's November three-week-long examination of States Parties came to a close. Last week I sat in on the sessions relating to Moldova, during which the Rapporteur on Moldova publicly commended the country on its definition of torture in its criminal code due to it being in line with Article 1 of the UN Convention. Let me tell you that this is a rare occurence! Usually, the UN Committee has some comment to make regarding the definition of torture in national legislation. In short, States Parties frequently fail to incorporate all the elements of Article 1 in their national legislation.     

 

 

 

 

 

Matthew Pringle

It is also possible that ill-treatment is not used for a specific purppose but arises from difficiencies in the system of detention and the lack of safeguards for detainees - identifying systemic causes and risks of ill-treatment in places of detnetion is therefore an essential part of preventive work. 

Jem Stevens
Asia-Pacific Programme Officer
Association for the Prevention of Torture

Have you done much examination of the histories of the perpetrators of domestic torture, Jeanne? I know of one case where a US soldier returned from Laos, where he was decorated for torturing people, and eventually set up a torture chamber in his basement for his wife and son. When I learned of it, all three were recieving psychological treatment, the father in prison. Is it common for torurers to cross the line between state and domestic torture?

Dear Jeanne,

You raised important issues. I would like to express my opinion on one of the issues you raised. As far as I am concerned, torture is a technical term for brutality of state agents such as the law enforcement officers (police and gendermeria), prison guards, staff of mental hospitals or staff of child care instutions etc. One of the main element of torture is to use of state power to give pain to victims.  If individuals act each other  in a brutal way, that is an bodily assault, injury or intentianla killling. Of course, the criminal justice sytsem should be able to protect the individuals against such kind of offences. Penal Codes should have provision punishing such offenders. If the state organs fail to implement these law, state agents may be responsible for breach of positive responsibility to protect citizens from torture. Using the word of tortore in every case might  reduce the impact of the term in the long term. 

Professor Dr. Vahit Biçak

www.vahitbicak.com

Jeanne,

Thank you for raising these points. I wanted to specifically address your initial assumption and clarify your question about the parameters of the dialogue topic. 

This particular dialogue was selected to focus specifically on law enforcement and the training methods, tools, and mechanisms being used to help prevent, intervene in and address incidences of ill-treatment and torture by law enforcement personnel upon individuals in the communities in which they are tasked to serve and protect.  

I think we did have the general assumption that the ill-treatment and torture is taking place in the course of law enforcement duties. Both you and Vernon's comment have raised a particularly interesting point to examine, regarding the danger and potential of law enforcement (and soldiers from Vernon's comment) to bring these behaviors of ill-treatment and torture into their own homes and against their family members.

I hope this comment helps to clarify the reasoning behind the particular themes that were selected and the general discourse that has been taking place.

Nancy Pearson, New Tactics in Human Rights Program Manager

Jeanne:

 I fully agree with your assertion that the government has an obligation to protect its citizens and/or those in its borders within the private sphere as well. Indeed, that's precisely why I suggested that the term should apply to "state-sponsored, state-supported, or, at a minimum, state-tolerated torture." Regrettably, I suspect, people will always be inclined to inflict torture on other people. The number of people so motivated may change, their motivations may vary, and so on. If the government is doing its best to prosecute the wrongdoers, though, it seems to me the government is doing what it is supposed to do morally and legally. The BTK murderer in Kansas is, I think, a good case in point. Clearly he tortured, but I don't think it could be said fairly that the state facilitated that in any way.

 

Philip Lyons, (USA), Executive Director, Texas Regional Center for Policing Innovation, (TRCPI) and Faculty Professor, Sam Houston State University, College of Criminal Justice

Jeanne:

Thanks for your question. As to the first one, Texas does have laws that prohibit the improper infliction of bodily harm in the form of assault stautes and aggravated assault statutes depending on the extent of the harm. Those statutes are applicable, irrespective of whether the perpetrator is a state actor. In addition to standard assault liability, state actors may be liable for added penalties under statutes that specifically reach state action (e.g., our "Official Oppression" statute). Also, public officials who are "acting under color of law," are also liable under federal law if they engage in conduct that constitutes a violation of civil rights.

 

As to your second question, the harm inflicted on a prisoner would subject the officer to: (a) federal civil rights liability, (b) state official oppression liability, and (c) state assault or aggravated assault liability [incidentally, the protection against double jeopardy only applies where the same jurisdiction is involved; thus, the officer could be liable simultaneously under federal and state law for the same conduct]. The same harm inflicted against a spouse, for example, would subject the perpetrator only to assault or aggravated assault liability because the perpetrator is not acting under color of law.

Your final question turns on a determination as to whether the person is "acting under color of law." This involves a case-by-case determination. The more the conduct relates to the performance of the officer's duties, the more it is likely to be found to be under color of law. The more the conduct seems to be private, the less likely it is to be found to be under color of law.

 

Respectfully,

Philip Lyons, (USA), Executive Director, Texas Regional Center for Policing Innovation, (TRCPI) and Faculty Professor, Sam Houston State University, College of Criminal Justice

A public officer who performs any act towards a person that is
incompatible with human dignity, and which causes that person to suffer
physically or mentally, or affects the person`s capacity to perceive or
his ability to act his own will or insults them shoul be sentenced for
comminting an act of torture.

If the offence is committed agaist;

- a child, a person who is physically or mentally incapable of defending himself or a pregnant women; or

- a public officer or an advocate on account of the performance of his duty,

- if the act is conducted in the manner of sexual harassment,

 

penalty should be increased/

 

 

 

Professor Dr. Vahit Biçak
www.vahitbicak.com

Michael Kellett writes;

Work started to develop the database but
funding ran out and the staff member initiating it left the organisation. I
think it exists now in a very basic form. If any one wants to find out more
about it the person responsible for it now is Martin Zeman (martin [dot] zeman [at] coe [dot] int )

 

---