advertisement

Police Constables Too Have Human Rights

67 %
33 %
advertisement
Information about Police Constables Too Have Human Rights

Published on June 3, 2016

Author: NagarajaMysuruRaghup

Source: slideshare.net

advertisement

1. S.O.S e - Voice For Justice - e-news weekly Spreading the light of humanity & freedom Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.12..Issue.23........11/06/2016 Editorial : Police Constables are also Human Beings & Police Constables Too Have Human Rights An Appeal to National Human rights Commission and Supreme Court of India Police Constables are also Human Beings , one among us who has chosen the job of policing for livelihood. Since decades their human rights , constitutional rights are violated , their voices seeking justice are suppressed by superior police officers. The Police Constables who tried to organize them , who asked for justice were dismissed from police service. It has a boomerang effect on vulnerable sections of society. The police constables who work under extreme psychological stress , who’s very own rights are violated are prone to committing rights violations of the weaker people. Till we as a society , government , Superior Police Officers start respecting the human rights of Police constables , we can not expect police constables to respect human rights of others. It is simple Give Respect & Take Respect. Hereby , We appeal to Honourable National Human Rights Commission of India and Honourable Supreme Court of India , to register following PILs and to protect the Human Rights of both Police Constables and the Public alike. Jai Hind. Vande Mataram. Your’s sincerely , Nagaraja.M.R. Karnataka: 50000 cops apply for ‘harassment leave’; may go on strike The police personnel are protesting against harassment by senior officers in the name of discipline. Akhila Karnataka Police Maha Sangha is leading the movement, which will be a major embarrassment to the state government if it is successful. (Representational Image) BENGALURU: In a first of its kind in the state, police personnel are planning to go on mass leave on June 4, in protest against the harassment by senior officers in the name of discipline, meagre salary, no proper leaves and other issues faced on the professional front. It has been learned that more than 50,000 policemen across the state have already applied for ‘Harassment Leave’ on June 4. However, police heads of all districts have issued orders to all police station heads directing them not to grant leave to any staff on that day. Akhila Karnataka Police Maha Sangha is leading the movement, which will be a major embarrassment to the state government if it is successful. V. Shashidhar, the Founder President of the Organisation, told Deccan Chronicle that the movement gained momentum after a few policemen approached him with the plan of protesting against the system. “They told me that all the policemen should go on leave on the same day to pass a strong message to the government and they requested me to lead the movement, as there is no proper forum to fight for the rights of policemen. Then I started working towards it and it gained support from thousands of policemen and also various other organisations,” Shashidhar said. “There are around 85,000 policemen in the state. In this, 65,000 staff is constabulary, which is the most harassed section. Forget decent salary, they are not even able to spend time with their families. They don’t get leaves even during emergency situations. Even for small issues, they have to face suspensions in the name of ‘disciplinary action’. Their working condition is pathetic as they have to work more than 15 hours at a stretch without basic amenities. This is nothing but gross violation of human rights. Despite repeated requests for the last 25-30 years the governments have not done anything to sort out the issues and even courts did not rule in favour of policemen. Thus, they have reached threshold and are ready to give a clear message to the government this time,” he said. As it is obvious that the higher ups won’t grant leave on June 4, the policemen have reportedly decided to not turn up for work on that day. “However, they won’t come on streets to protest as they belong to disciplinary force. Instead, we are requesting their family members to protest on behalf of them. Also, various organisations like Karnataka Rakshana Vedike have supported our cause and will join hands with us,” Shashidhar added.

2. PIL – Treat Police Constables Humanely An Appeal to National Human Rights Commission of India and Supreme Court of India IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016 IN THE MATTER OF NAGARAJA . M.R editor , SOS e Clarion of Dalit & SOS e Voice for Justice # LIG 2 , No 761 ,, HUDCO First Stage , Laxmikantanagar , Hebbal , Mysore – 570017 , Karnataka State . ....Petitioner Versus Honourable Chief Secretary , Government of Karnataka & Others ....Respondents PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 12 to ARTICLE 35 & ARTICLE 51A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS UNDER ARTICLE 32 & ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. To , 1. Hon'ble The Chief Justice of India and His Lordship's Companion Justices of the Supreme Court of India. 2. Hon’ble Chairman , National Human Rights Commission of India The Humble petition of the Petitioner above named. MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH : 1. Facts of the case: Police constables are also Human Beings and must be treated as such by superior officers and all. As every other Human Being , police constables also has got human rights of equality , dignity of labor , equitable justice. As Indian citizens police constables has constitutionally guaranteed rights of equality , equitable justice , etc. Police constables are appointed , trained for the very specific purpose of maintaining law , order and detecting crimes. When police constables are treated humanely by superiors and others , they will reciprocate the same. Police constables are always under the threat of criminals , anti nationals , mafia. But they are not paid any compensation by government when murdered by criminals , on the lines of soldiers becoming martyr during war. Government has enacted laws enforcing equal pay for equal work , 1 earned leave for 20 working days , maximum of 8 working hours , one paid weekly off after 48 working hours or 6 days , for all private & public sectoremployees. In case of urgency over time work can be allotted to worker with his willingness ( not forced ) at the rate of double wages. For violation of these laws , labor department officials will prosecute guilty company executives. Since decades , police constables are not paid equal wages in comparison to their counterparts in otherstates and with people of their own rank like teachers , electric line mans , etc in our state itself. Everyday they are forced to work beyond 8 hours without any additional wages. Leaves are not sanctioned.They are addressed by first name in vulgar language by superior officers and forced to do menial jobs by superior officers which are not part of police manual or service rules. Those who refuse to do it are dismissed by superior officers citing indiscipline. Day in day out every second police constables are treated inhumanely by superior officers. POLICE CONSTABLES HUMAN RIGHTS ARE VIOLATED by superior officers since decades.These police constables work under extreme psychologicalstress and some police constables vent out their anger on innocents , suspects in lock up by using 3rd degree torture methods. Some other constables have fired at their superior officers and some have gone to the extreme of committing suicide. In the name of discipline , job security , the doors to legal redress of grievances are shut for police constables. Till violation of Human Rights of Police Constables are not stopped ,you can not stop human rights violations by police , 3rd degree torture of innocents , lock up deaths by police. 2. Question(s) of Law: Is it right for senior government officials , police officers , ministers , judges to violate HUMAN RIGHTS , CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS of Police Constables ? 3. Grounds: Requests for equitable justice , protection of constitutionalrights , human rights of police constables and Prosecution of guilty judges , police officers , IAS officers , ministers. 4. Averment:

3. Please read following cases at website mentioned below : http://www.livelaw.in/tamil-nadu-judge-serves-memo-female-court-staff-not-washing-innerwear/ , http://www.deccanherald.com/content/115594/these-cops-much-abused-bosses.html , Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the following cases to perform their duties , to respect the Human Rights , Constitutional Rights of police constables. That the present petitioner has not filed any otherpetition (which are admitted by courts)in any High Court or the Supreme Court of India on the subject matter of the present petition. PRAYER: In the above premises, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased: a . Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issu e instructions to the chief secretaries of all stae governments , the concerned public servants in the present case , to perform their duties. b . to pass such otherorders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. c. To legally prosecute guilty judges , police officers , IAS officers , ministers and their family members who are ill treating ( under threat ) police constables and violating their human rights , constitutional rights. d. To immediately ban colonial era systemof providing police constables as orderlies to senior government officials , judges , ministers. e. To immediately order respective state governments to pay over time pay to all police constables with back wages , over time wages since their appointment till date. f. To immediately order state governments to start process of police constables recruitment. g. To give staggered weekly off to all police constables without fail. h. To order state governments to strictly pay equal wages for equal work to all police constables in comparison to their counterparts in other states and state government employees of their same rank in their own states. i. To order state governments to pay compensation to police constables who die in the line of duty on par with military compensation. j. To order state government to constitute district committees comprising of district head of police , doctor, psychiatrist , behavior specialist and human rights expert , providing a forum for victimized police constables to air their grievances and in turn getting counseling , grievance redress. This will go a long way in controlling 3rd degree torture of innocents by police , lock up deaths also. FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY. Dated : 29th April 2016 …………………….FILED BY: NAGARAJA.M.R. Place : Mysuru , India……………………. PETITIONER-IN-PERSON PIL – Ban Orderly services performed by Police Constables , others An Appeal to National Human Rights Commission of India and Supreme Court of India IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016 IN THE MATTER OF NAGARAJA . M.R editor SOS e Clarion of Dalit & SOS e Voice for Justice # LIG 2 , No 761 ,, HUDCO First Stage , Laxmikantanagar , Hebbal , Mysore – 570017 , Karnataka State . ....Petitioner Versus Honourable Chief Secretary , Government of Karnataka & Others ....Respondents PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 12 to ARTICLE 35 & ARTICLE 51A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS UNDER ARTICLE 32 & ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. To , 1. Hon'ble The Chief Justice of India and His Lordship's Companion Justices of the Supreme Court of India.

4. 2. Hon’ble Chairman , National Human Rights Commission of India The Humble petition of the Petitioner above named. MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH : 1. Facts of the case: Police constables are appointed , trained for the very specific purpose of maintaining law , order and detecting crimes. Dalayaths , peons in various state & central government departments are appointed , trained for the very specific purpose of assisting their immediate superior in official duties. Police constables ,Peons , Dalayaths are PUBLIC SERVANTS / GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS paid from public exchequer to do public duties. Police Constables , Peons , Dalayaths are Human Beings , deserve respect by all including their superiors. Police Constables , Peons , Dalayaths are ill treated , they are treated as SLAVES / Bonded Labourers by their superior judges , police officers , IAS officers , Ministers , etc. They are forced to do menial jobs (other than official duties ) like clearing night soil from sewage line , washing under wears , clothes of officer & his family members , polishing shoes of officers , their family members , washing clothes , cooking utensils , etc. If the officer & his family members are suffering from PARALYSIS or any other health problems which makes them unable to perform their own work , then they can appoint private persons by paying from their personalpockets. 2. Question(s) of Law: Is it right for senior government officials to force ( under threat ) their subordinate officials to do officer’s personal, private work ? 3. Grounds: Requests for equitable justice , protection of constitutionalrights , human rights of police constables ,dalayaths , peons and Prosecution of guilty judges , police officers , IAS officers , ministers. 4. Averment: Please read following cases at website mentioned below : http://www.livelaw.in/tamil-nadu-judge-serves-memo-female-court-staff-not-washing-innerwear/ , http://www.deccanherald.com/content/115594/these-cops-much-abused-bosses.html , Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the following cases to perform their duties , to respect the rights of police constables , dalayaths , peons.To assign proper official duties to police constables ,dalayaths & peons. That the present petitioner has not filed any otherpetition (which are admitted by courts)in any High Court or the Supreme Court of India on the subject matter of the present petition. PRAYER: In the above premises, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased: a . Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issu e instructions to the concerned public servants in the present case , to perform their duties. b . to pass such otherorders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. c. To legally prosecute guilty judges , police officers , IAS officers , ministers and their family members who are ill treating ( under threat ) police constables , dalayaths , peons. d. To immediately ban colonial era systemof providing orderlies to senior government officials. FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY. Dated : 20th April 2016 …………………….FILED BY: NAGARAJA.M.R. Place : Mysuru , India……………………. PETITIONER-IN-PERSON The pitiable conditions constables live in The Sunday’s incident of a police constable shooting at sub-inspectorin Rajanakunte police station over a spat,points at the mental agony the constables go through every day.

5. Not only constables,even senior police officers accept the fact that acute crunch of staff and 'ill-treatment' of policemen by their seniors are the causes for the tiff between constables and seniorofficers. Bad working and living conditions A 28-year-old constable working in Basaveshwaranagarpolice station said that he regretted his decision of joining the department. “During our training days,we are prepared to work under any situations.After we start working, most of us realise that the training programme is nothing like the present working conditions,as we work in horrible conditions.The list of problems start with basics like toilets. There are no good toilets in most of the stations in the city. The condition of houses in police quarters is miserable. They are built some decades ago and are not even repaired. Most of them are not even provided quarters. Though they are provided, it will be very far from the stations we work. For instance,if a constable is working in a police station in south division, he will be given a house in north or north-east division. It will take at least an hourto reach the station and two hours a day is wasted on travelling, besides working for a minimum of 12 hours,” he said. No promotions after many years of service A head constable working in Yelahanka police station said, “A sub-inspectorwill be promoted as inspectorjust after 5-6 years of service. But I had to wait for 20 years for a promotion from constable to head constable rank. My case is betteras there are so many who have retired as constables.I don ’t have any hope that I will retire as an assistant sub- inspector.” No day offs, no leaves A constable in Wilson Garden station said, “Some of the senior officials react as if we are committing a ‘crime’ if we ask for leave. If some of the family members or close relatives pass away, we will be granted leave, that too on suspicion.People will be in celebration mood during fes tive seasons,but we are not supposed to take leave for festivals. We are paid a meagre amount for working on holidays. Some officers use us for their personalworks. When this is the situatio n, how can we get rejuvenated in regular intervals.” Expert take Retired DGP D V Guruprasad, who had done a survey— A profile of Junior ranks of Karnataka Police: A survey of their Attitudes,Behaviour, Mental makeup and Stress levels — in 2007 said, “Unhygienic working and living conditions are the basic reasons for stress among policemen. They are overworked and are deprived of spending time with their family members. There are no recreation activities at work place. Shortage of staff is anothermajor reason for the stress the policemen are going through.” Karnataka Police Constables used as Construction Workers The whole issue came to light when an unknown person filmed the police constables engaged in the construction ofthe house. A senior Karnataka State Reserve Police (KSRP) force is underthe limelight with an inquiry initiated against him. The Hindu reports that a Superintendent of Police attached to the Karnataka State Reserve Police (KSRP) had allegedly misused police constables for personalwork. The report states that h e used themin place of construction labourers to build his house in Parappana Agrahara. The whole issue came to light when an unknown person filmed the police constables engaged in the construction of the house on their mobile phone.The report states that senior police officers are now investigating the veracity of the video footage. Using police constables for personalwork is illegal, added the source. Additional Director General of Police Kamal Pant has reportedly ordered an inquiry by a senior officer. There has also been a show cause notice issued to Superintendent of Police Revanna who is attached to the 4{+t}{+h}Battalion, KSRP. The daily adds that Revanna reportedly denied the allegations when he was questioned by senior police personnel.“We have recorded his statement and also summoned the personnelwho were seen in the video footage for questioning,” a senior police officer was quoted by the daily as stating. Should police constables continue to cook and clean for senior officers? They cook, clean, tend to the garden, drop off the children to schooland pick them up, take their employers’ wives out for errands. But they aren’t domestic workers. Meet the orderlies of police forces across the country,part of a systemthat was put in place during the British rule over the Indian sub-continent. While a Parliamentary panel has recommended that the systemof orderlies be abolished from both the Army, and the state police forces, the report found no takers. Recently, Director-General and Inspector-General of the Karnataka Police Om Prakash and his son were jointly interviewing around 10-15 police constables so that they could be deputed as orderlies, according to a Bangalore Mirror report. Low ranking police personneldrawn from the reserve police, orderlies are deputed into the service of officers of Deputy Superintendent of Police and above.According to a Deccan Chronicle report, each officer can avail a certain number of orderlies but information procured under the Right to Information Act showed that many officers were violating these norms. Police officials who spoke to The News Minute on condition of anonymity said that in most cases,those who were deputed as orderlies were doing the personal errands of the officers. In one case, a police constable recalls the Police Control Room van or the PCR van introduced in Karnataka’s cities some years was used to ferry the family of a senior officer around when they were visiting the city. In August 2013, The Hindu reported that Bengaluru-based RTI activist group Mahiti Hakku Adhyanana Kendra had sought information from the state police on the status of orderlies. It turned out that around 3,000 constables were working as orderlies, and the state incurred an annual expenditure of around Rs 78 crore for providing orderlies. In April 2013, a Parliamentary panel comprising 29 MPs and headed by BJP Rajya Sabha member Venkaiah Naidu recommended that the government abo lish the practice

6. altogether. The Times of India had reported that even the Second Administrative Reforms Committee and the Sixth Pay Commission too had said the same. The Parliamentary panel however, had also recommended that the government sanction posts ofcooks, drivers and attendants sep arately,when the country had a shortage of over five lakh police personnel in a sanctioned strength of 21.24 lakh. Several years before this, however, Andhra Pradesh had done away with the system,after an orderly died under mysterious circumstances. This culture of subservience to a higher ranking official is not just limited to the orderly systemwhen it comes to the police. It pervades the entire hierarchy where every official exerts power over those junior to themselves. During a visit to a police station this reporter remembers meeting a Deputy Superintendent of Police in charge of the district crime records bureau for some statistics.Sitting at his table in a run-down office, the DySP said: “Eh, barappa illi!” (Come here you!). Bending a little, he pulled up a plastic bag from under the table and removed the jar of a mixer from inside, and asked the constable who turned up to get it repaired. Anotherpractice that the police have is the “salaam” culture. One constable in every police station is supposed to hold a rifle – unloaded – and wait at the entrance of the police station.That constable’s job is to stand in attention and salute every officer above the rank of sub-inspectorwhen they come and go. The “mai-baap” mentality is everywhere, even outside the Deputy Commissioner or Collector’s office, standing in ujala-tinged white uniform and red sash,complete with red- trimmed turban to salute and be ignored. It’s high time we do away with it. Karnataka top police official transferred for alleged misuse of staff A senior police official has been transferred by Karnataka government after a video purportedly showing staff under him being used for cleaning a community hall owned by him surfaced. Chief Minister Siddaramaiah ordered the transfer of DIG Railways H S Venkatesh as the video surfaced showing police personnelunderhim being used for cleaning of a community hall, official sources said today. They said the Chief Minister himself questioned about the incident in a meeting with top police officials yesterday and sought a report from them. Venkatesh has not been given any posting. The video has come as an embarrassment to the government which is bracing itself to deal with the threat by the constabulary to go on a mass leave on June 4, against alleged harassment of lower rank police personnel by senior officials, lesserpay and otherissues. The visuals showed police personnel in uniform sweeping and mopping the community hall, owned by Venkatesh. The video was reportedly shot by constables used for the work ahead the inauguration of the community hall in April. Karnataka Police Constables Forced to do Domestic Work https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT5ASTyMvSw , 73% Police In India Work 7 Days A Week Every Month, Causing Health Issues, Demotivation A recent report published by the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BRPD) and Administrative Staff College of India (ASCI) has fo und that 90% of police officers work for more than eight hours a day and 73% do not get a weekly off even once a month. That's not all. They are often called into work on their rare holidays for emergency work. If a police officer in your area doesn't work efficiently or has a bad attitude it might be because of this reason. The police force is highly overworked, underpaid and completely under-staffed. These terrible working conditions have lead to serious health concerns,widespread discontent and demotivation within the police force, which eventually results in a diminished perception of the police by the general public. According to Times of India , the research involved extensive field survey including 12,156 police station staff, 1,003 SHOs and 962 supervisory officers, from ranks ranging from constables to IGPs, in 319 districts in 23 states and two Union Territories. All nine police stations types - metropolitan, urban, urban-rural mixed, rural, crime, traffic, women, tribal and others were covered in the survey.

7. " The field survey conducted among the large samples of SHOs and supervisory offices indicates that nearly 90% of police statio n staffworks for more than eight hours a day. More than 68% of SHOs and over 76% of supervisory officers stated that staff members in police stations were on duty for 11 hours or more per day. 27.7% SHOs and 30.4% supervisory officers reported that their staff worked for more than 14 hours a day," the study said. The study also shows that the current working hours are not in consonance with Indian labour laws, or international laws, they are also in violation of Article 42 of the Indian Constitution. Talking about impacts, the study said,"The long hours of duty have had multiple negative impacts on efficient policing. Nearly two-thirds (74%) of respondents among police station staff have reported that the current working hours lead to health problems of different kinds for them. A large majority (more than 76%) of SHOs also felt that the current duty hour arrangement was deleterious to health of staff. Conditions like joint pain due to long hours of standing,stress,sleeplessness,acid ity,etc seem to occur early in life of police personnel. " All of this takes a toll on their moral, motivation and self-esteem. Their overall behaviourwith the public is probably a manifestation of their poorworking conditions. More than anything,the conditions within which they work have adverse affects on their quality of work. Weary and tired policemen will not be able to perform their best,whether it is in crime investigation, law and order duties,information gathering or patrolling. Their job performance will be affected and thus our safety will be jeopardised. The study said introduction of shift systemwould mean rationalizing the work hournorms for police station staff to more acceptable limits. According to the SHOs, there was a need of 1.68 times strength of the present sanctioned strength for the shift system. The study suggested that augmentation of police station strength with some 337,500 personnel (50% of the present sanctioned strength)would take the ratio of police station manpower to a little over 45% of the total police strength in the states/Union Territories, and this would help in ensuring efficient policing. "Shift systemof functioning in police stations is absolutely imperative for efficient and people-friendly policing, as also for conducive work-life balance for police personnel. Implementation of shift systemin police station work is a functionally achievable objective, as established by our case studies of the 8-hour duty systemof Kerala Police," the study said. The police force in this country is highly under-appreciated, they work non-stop and have no means of releasing frustration otherthan on the public. Police brutality has become a growing problem, resulting in the public completely losing faith in those entrusted to keep them safe. But one cannot solely blame the cops for this, they are expected to get results and get them fast. They use whatever means necessary - not to say that this should be excused - but what choices are they left with? The government needs to put in a great deal of effort to increase funding and employment within the force. Perhaps increasing the number of women officers to take some of the burden off the men could be a start. Indian Police Constables work culture http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/7597/12/12_chapter%207.pdf , http://indiatoday.intoday.in/video/karnataka-police-constables-demand-better-work-conditions-go-on-mass-leave-on-june-4/1/678524.html Pocket Book for Police – Human Rights Standards http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/training5Add3en.pdf Understanding the Psychology of Police Misconduct By Brian D. Fitch, PhD, Lieutenant, Los Angeles, California, Sheriff’s Department

8. Law enforcement is a unique profession, with officers experiencing a host of freedoms not available to the general public, including the application of deadly force, high-speed driving, and seizing personal property. While these liberties may be necessary, they also can create opportunities for wrongdoing, especially if such behavior is likely to go undetected because of poor supervision. The embarrassment caused by misconduct can damage the public trust, undermine officer morale, and expose agencies to unnecessary—and, in many cases, costly—litigation.1 Consequently, a clear understanding of the psychology underlying unethical behavior is critical to every law enforcement supervisor and manager at every level of an organization, regardless of one’s agency or mission. Law enforcement agencies go to great lengths to recruit, hire, and train only the most qualified applicants—candidates who have already demonstrated a track record of good moral values and ethical conduct. Similarly, most officers support the agency, its values, and its mission, performing their duties ethically while avoiding any misconduct or abuse of authority. Yet despite the best efforts of organizations everywhere, it seems that one does not have to look very far these days to find examples of police misconduct, particularly in the popular press.2 Even more disturbing, however, is that many of the officers engaged in immoral or unethical behavior previously demonstrated good service records, absent any of the “evil” typically associated with corruption or abuse. While it is probably true that at least some of the officers who engage in illicit activities managed somehow to slip through the cracks in the hiring process and simply continued their unethical ways, this account fails to explain how otherwise good officers become involved in misconduct. The purpose of this article is to familiarize law enforcement managers and supervisors with the cognitive rationalizations that can contribute to unethical behavior. The article also offers strategies and suggestions intended to mitigate misconduct, before it actually occurs, by developing a culture of ethics. Moral Responsibility and Disengagement Most law enforcement professionals are, at their core, good, ethical, and caring people. Despite the overuse of a popular cliché, many officers do in fact enter law enforcement because they want to make a positive difference in their communities. Officers frequently espouse strong, positive moral values while working diligently—in many cases, at great personal risk—to bring dangerous criminals to justice. Doing so provides officers with a strong sense of personal satisfaction and self-worth. As a result, most officers do not—and in many cases cannot—engage in unethical conduct unless they can somehow justify to themselves the morality of their actions.3 Decades of empirical research have supported the idea that whenever a person’s behaviors are inconsistent with their attitudes or beliefs, the individual will experience a state of psychological tension—a phenomenon referred to as cognitive dissonance. 4 Because this tension is uncomfortable, people will modify any contradictory beliefs or behaviors in ways intended to reduce or eliminate discomfort. Officers can reduce psychological tension by changing one or more of their cognitions—that is, by modifying how they think about their actions and the consequences of those behaviors—or by adjusting their activities, attitudes, or beliefs in ways that are consistent with their values and self-image. Generally speaking, an officer will modify the cognition that is least resistant to change, which, in most cases, tends to be the officer’s attitudes, not behaviors. One of the simplest ways that officers can reduce the psychological discomfort that accompanies misconduct is to cognitively restructure unethical behaviors in ways that make them seem personally and socially acceptable, thereby allowing officers to behave immorally while preserving their self-image as ethically good people. The following is a partial list of common rationalizations that officers can use to neutralize or excuse unethical conduct:5 Table 1: Rationalizing Misconduct Strategy Description Denial of Victim Alleging that because there is no legitimate victim, there is no misconduct. Victim of Circumstance Behaving improperly because the officer had no other choice, either because of peer pressure or unethical supervision. Denial of Injury Because nobody was hurt by the officer’s action, no misconduct actually occurred. Advantageous Comparisons Minimizing or excusing one’s own wrongdoing by comparing it to the more egregious behavior of others. Higher Cause Breaking the rules because of some higher calling—that is, removing a known felon from the streets. Blame the Victim The victim invited any suffering or misconduct by breaking the law in the first place. Dehumanization Using euphemistic language to dehumanize people, thereby making them easier to victimize. Diffusion of Responsibility Relying on the diffusion of responsibility among the involved parties to excuse misconduct. Denial of victim. Officers who rely on this tactic argue that because no victim exists, no real harm has been done. It is probably safe to suggest that officers do not generally regard drug dealers, thieves, and sexual predators as bona fide victims, regardless of the nature of an officer’s conduct. An officer, for instance, who takes money from a suspected drug dealer during the service of a search warrant might argue that because the dealer acquired the currency illegally, the dealer was never actually entitled to the proceeds. Rather, the money belongs to whoever possesses it at the time. Victim of circumstance. Officers who utilize this method convince themselves that they behaved improperly only because they had no other choice. Officers may claim that they were the victims of peer pressure, an unethical supervisor, or an environment where “everyone else is doing it,” so what else could they possibly have done? Regardless of the context, these officers excuse their conduct by alleging that they had no alternative but to act unethically.

9. Denial of injury. Using this form of rationalization, officers persuade themselves that because nobody was actually hurt by their actions, their behavior was not really immoral. This explanation is especially common in cases involving drugs, stolen property, or large amounts of untraceable cash where it can be difficult, if not impossible, to identify an injured party. Officers who use this tactic may further neutralize their deviant conduct by comparing it to the harm being done by the drug dealer from whom the money was stolen. Advantageous comparisons. Officers who depend on this explanation rely on selective social comparisons to defend their conduct. Officers who falsify a police report to convict a suspected drug dealer, for example, might defend their actions by minimizing their participation or the frequency of their unethical behavior, while at the same time vilifying a coworker as someone who “lies all the time on reports.” In comparison to an officer who routinely falsifies reports, the first officer’s conduct can seem less egregious. Higher cause. Officers who practice this type of cognitive restructuring argue that sometimes, it may be necessary to break certain rules to serve a higher calling or to achieve a more important goal. An officer who conducts an unlawful search to uncover evidence against a suspected pedophile might reason that the nature of the crime justifies breaking the rules. “The ends justify the means,” officers might assert—suggesting that they did what was necessary, regardless of the legality or morality of their conduct, to put a dangerous criminal behind bars. This form of rationalization can be especially disturbing because it goes beyond merely excusing or justifying deviant behavior to the point of actually glorifying certain forms of wrongdoing in the name of “justice” or “the greater good.” Blame the victim. An officer who uses this form of justification blames the victim for any misconduct or abuse. If, for instance, officers use unreasonable force on a suspected drug dealer, they can simply argue that the victim brought on this suffering by violating the law. “If the dealer doesn’t want to get beat up, the dealer should obey the law,” the officer might reason. “I’m not using force on law-abiding citizens, only on drug dealers; they give up their rights when they break the rules.” By assigning blame to the victim, the officer not only finds a way to excuse any wrongdoing, but also a way to feel sanctimonious about doing so. Dehumanization. The amount of guilt or shame officers feel for behaving unethically depends, at least in part, on how they regard the person being abused. To avoid the feelings of self-censorship or guilt that often accompany misconduct, officers can employ euphemistic language to strip victims of their humanity. Using terms like “dirtbag” to describe law violators has the effect of dehumanizing intended targets, generally making it easier for officers to justify, ignore, or minimize the harmful effects of their actions, while at the same time reducing their personal responsibility for behaving in ways that they know are wrong. Diffusion of responsibility. An officer who uses this excuse relies on the shared participation—and, by extension, the shared guilt—of everyone involved in an incident of misconduct to excuse or reduce any personal culpability. With each additional accomplice, every individual officer is seen as that much less responsible for any wrongdoing that might have occurred. If, for instance, money is stolen from an arrestee, officers might assert that there were many officers at the crime scene who could have done this, so an individual cannot be blamed. Similarly, if ten officers were involved in the service of a search warrant, then each officer is only one-tenth responsible for any misconduct that occurs. Misconduct’s Slippery Slope It is important to note that most officers do not jump headfirst into large-scale misconduct—instead, they weigh in gradually in a process referred to as incrementalism.6 The strength and ease with which officers can rationalize unethical behavior also depends, at least in part, on how they view their conduct, the people harmed by their actions, and the consequences that flow from their actions. An officer’s initial slide down the slippery slope of misconduct can begin with nothing more than simple policy violations that, if left unchecked, generate a mild feeling of psychological tension or discomfort. However, by learning to rationalize wrongdoing in ways that make it psychologically and morally acceptable, officers are able to relieve any feelings of distress or discomfort, effectively disengaging their moral compasses. Officers can employ cognitive rationalizations prospectively (before the corrupt act) to forestall guilt and resistance, or retrospectively (after the misconduct) to erase any regrets. In either case, the more frequently an officer rationalizes deviant behavior, the easier each subsequent instance of misconduct becomes.7This is because the more frequently officers employ rationalizations, the easier it becomes to activate similar thought patterns in the future. With time and repeated experience, rationalizations can eventually become part of the habitual, automatic, effortless ways that officers think about themselves, their duties, and the consequences of their actions, eventually allowing officers to engage in increasingly egregious acts of misconduct with little, if any, of the guilt or shame commonly associated with wrongdoing. As officers learn to pay less attention to the morality of their actions, the ways they think about misconduct—that is, their attitudes, beliefs, and values—may begin to change as well. Officers can begin defining behaviors that were once seen as unethical or immoral as necessary parts of completing their assigned duties. Even more troubling, however, is that once rationalizations become part of an agency’s dominant culture, they can alter the ways officers define misconduct, particularly if wrongdoings are rewarded either informally by an officer’s peer group or formally by the organization. Ethics Education Law enforcement agencies throughout the United States, as well as abroad, have begun to recognize the importance of ethics training. While such attention represents a significant step in the right direction, ethical instruction is often limited to little more than the discussion and development of proper moral values—an approach commonly referred to as character education.8 Proponents of this method suggest that officers who possess the right values—and, by extension, the right character—will always do the right thing, regardless of the circumstances. Although few people would argue with the importance of good moral values and character, ethical decisions are not always simple. Before officers can act ethically, they must recognize the moral nature of a situation; decide on a specific and, hopefully, ethical course of action; possess the requisite moral motivation to take action; and demonstrate the character necessary to follow through with his decision.9 To further complicate matters, even the best of intentions can be thwarted by peer pressure or fear of retaliation. For example, the 2003 National Business Ethics Survey found that approximately 40 percent of those surveyed would not report misconduct if they observed it because of fear of reprisal from management.10 This cloud does, however, contain a silver lining. Research has demonstrated that ethics education can assist officers in better navigating moral challenges by increasing ethical awareness and moral reasoning—two critical aspects of ethical decision making.11 However, conducting meaningful ethics education requires more than lengthy philosophical lectures on the importance of character. Rather, instructors should focus on facilitating a dialogue that challenges officers on key moral issues and assumptions; tests their reasoning and decision-making skills; and allows them to share their experiences in a safe, supportive environment.12 For ethics education to be truly effective, organizations must make moral discussions a regular part of the agency’s training program. In the same way that officers routinely train in defensive tactics, firearms, and law to better prime them for field duties, officers should prepare equally well for any ethical issues they might encounter.13 Supervisors can stimulate ethical discussions with a video documentary, news clip, or fictional story.

10. Regardless of the stimulus, however, the more frequently officers discuss ethics, the better able they will be to recognize a moral dilemma, make the appropriate ethical decision, and demonstrate the moral courage necessary to behave honorably. Next, law enforcement agencies must establish a clear code of ethical conduct, including a set of core values and mission statement. Merely establishing a code of ethical conduct is not enough, however; the department’s top management must lead by example. It is important to remember that a code of conduct applies equally to employees at all levels of an organization.14 As most leaders can confirm from experience, officers can be surprisingly quick to point out any inconsistencies between the organization’s stated values and the conduct of senior management. If leaders expect officers to behave ethically, leaders must model the way. Departments must also work to create systems that reward ethical conduct and punish unethical behavior.15 Core values and codes of conduct are of little value if they are not supported by wider agency objectives that reward ethical actions. Not only should law enforcement organizations reward officers for behaving ethically, they must also seriously address officers’ ethical concerns by thoroughly investigating any allegations, while protecting the confidentiality of those reporting such incidents. And, finally, agencies should strive to create an open environment where ethical issues can be discussed without fear of punishment or reprisal. In the end, mitigating and, hopefully, eliminating misconduct require regular ethics training, high ethical standards, appropriate reward systems, and a culture in which ethical issues are discussed freely. While the responsibility for creating a culture of ethics rests with leadership, individual officers must do their part to behave ethically, support the moral conduct of others, and challenge misconduct in all its forms. Only by remaining vigilant to the psychology of misconduct can law enforcement professionals focus attention back on the positive aspects of their profession, while enjoying the high levels of public trust necessary to do their jobs. ■ CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment The States Parties to this Convention, Considering that,in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the equal and inalien able rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world, Recognizing that those rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person, Considering the obligation of States under the Charter, in particular Article 55, to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms, Having regard to article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which provide that no one may be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Having regard also to the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the General Assembly on 9 December 1975 (resolution 3452 (XXX)), Desiring to make more effective the struggle against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment throughout the world, Have agreed as follows: Part I Article 1 1. For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions. 2. This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application. Article 2 1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction. 2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever,whether a state of war or a threat or war,internal political instability or any other public emergency,may be invoked as a justification of torture. 3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture. Article 3 1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. 2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

11. Article 4 1. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture. 2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature. Article 5 1. Each State Party shall take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred to in article 4 in the following cases: 1. When the offences are committed in any territory under its jurisdiction or on board a ship or aircraft registered in that State; 2. When the alleged offender is a national of that State; 3. When the victim was a national of that State if that State considers it appropriate. 2. Each State Party shall likewise take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over such offences in cases where the alleged offender is present in any territory under its jurisdiction and it does not extradite him pursuant to article 8 to any of the States mentioned in Paragraph 1 of this article. 3. This Convention does not exclude any criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with internal law. Article 6 1. Upon being satisfied, after an examination of information available to it, that the circumstances so warrant,any State Party in whose territory a person alleged to have committed any offence referred to in article 4 is present, shall take him into custody or take other legal measures to ensure his presence. The custody and other legal measures shall be as provided in the law of that State but may be continued only for such time as is necessary to enable any criminal or extradition proceedings to be instituted. 2. Such State shall immediately make a preliminary inquiry into the facts. 3. Any person in custody pursuant to paragraph 1 of this article shall be assisted in communicating immediately with the nearest appropriate representative of the State of which he is a national, or, if he is a stateless person, to the representative of the State where he usually resides. 4. When a State, pursuant to this article, has taken a person into custody, it shall immediately notify the States referred to in article 5, paragraph 1, of the fact that such person is in custody and of the circumstances which warrant his detention. The State which makes the preliminary inquiry contemplated in paragraph 2 of this article shall promptly report its findings to the said State and shall indicate whether it intends to exercise jurisdiction. Article 7 1. The State Party in territory under whose jurisdiction a person alleged to have committed any offence referred to in article 4 is found, shall in the cases contemplated in article 5, if it does not extradite him, submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. 2. These authorities shall take their decision in the same manner as in the case of any ordinary offence of a serious nature under the law of that State. In the cases referred to in article 5, paragraph 2, the standards of evidence required for prosecution and conviction shall in no way be less stringent than those which apply in the cases referred to in article 5, paragraph 1. 3. Any person regarding whom proceedings are brought in connection with any of the offences referred to in article 4 shall be guaranteed fair treatment at all stages of the proceedings. Article 8 1. The offences referred to in article 4 shall be deemed to be included as extraditable offences in any extradition treaty existing between States Parties. States Parties undertake to include such offences as extraditable offences in every extradition treaty to be concluded between them. 2. If a State Party which makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty receives a request for extradition from another State Party with which it has no extradition treaty, it may consider this Convention as the legal basis for extradition in respect of such offenses. Extradition shall be subject to the other conditions provided by the law of the requested State. 3. States Parties which do not make extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty shall recognize such offences as extraditable offences between themselves subject to the conditions provided by the law of the requested state. 4. Such offences shall be treated, for the purpose of extradition between States Parties,as if they had been committed not only in the place in which they occurred but also in the territories of the States required to establish their jurisdiction in accordance with article 5, paragraph 1. Article 9 1. States Parties shall afford one another the greatest measure of assistance in connection with civil proceedings brought in respect of any of the offences referred to in article 4, including the supply of all evidence at their disposal necessary for the proceedings. 2. States Parties shall carry out their obligations under paragraph 1 of this article in conformity with any treaties on mutual judicial assistance that may exist between them. Article 10 1. Each State Party shall ensure that education and information regarding the prohibition against torture are fully included in the training of law enforcement personnel, civil or military, medical personnel, public officials and other persons who may be involved in the custody, interrogation or treatment of any individual subjected to any form of arrest,detention or imprisonment. 2. Each State Party shall include this prohibition in the rules or instructions issued in regard to the duties and functions of any such persons. Article 11 Each State Party shall keep under systematic review interrogation rules, instructions, methods and practices as well as arrangements for the custody and treatment of persons subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment in any territory under its jurisdiction, with a view to preventing any cases of torture. Article 12 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 committee in any territory under its jurisdiction. Article 13 Each State Party shall ensure that any individual who alleges he has been subjected to torture in any territory under its jurisdiction has the right to complain to and to have his case promptly and impartially examined its competent authorities. Steps shall be taken to ensure that the complainant and witnesses are protected against all ill-treatment or intimidation as a consequence of his complaint or any evidence given.

12. Article 14 1. Each State Party shall ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. In the event of the death of the victim as a result of an act of torture, his dependents shall be entitled to compensation. 2. Nothing in this article shall affect any right of the victim or other person to compensation which may exist under national law. Article 15 Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made. Article 16 1. Each State Party shall undertake to prevent in any territory under its jurisdiction other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture as defined in article 1, when such acts are committed by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. In particular, the obligations contained in articles 10, 11, 12 and 13 shall apply with the substitution for references to torture or references to other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. 2. The provisions of this Convention are without prejudice to the provisions of any other international instrument or national law which prohibit cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment or which relate to extradition or expulsion. Article 17 1. There shall be established a Committee against Torture (hereinafter referred to as the Committee) which shall carry out the functions hereinafter provided. The Committee shall consist of 10 experts of high moral standing and recognized competence in the field of human rights, who shall serve in their personal capacity. The experts shall be elected by the States Parties,consideration being given to equitable geographical distribution and to the usefulness of the participation of some persons having legal experience. 2. The members of the Committee shall be elected by secret ballot from a list of persons nominated by States Parties. Each State Party may nominate one person from among its own nationals. States Parties shall bear in mind the usefulness of nominating persons who are also members of the Human Rights Committee established under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and are willing to serve on the Committee against Torture. 3. Elections of the members of the Committee shall be held at biennial meetings of States Parties convened by the Secretary-Generalof the United Nations. At those meetings, for which two thirds of the States Parties shall constitute a quorum, the persons elected to the Committee shall be those who obtain the largest number of votes and an absolute majority of the votes of the representatives of States Parties present and voting. 4. The initial election shall be held no later than six months after the date of the entry into force of this Convention. At least four months before the date of each election, the Secretary-Generalof the United Nations shall address a letter to the States Parties inviting them to submit their nominations within three months. The Secretary-Generalshall prepare a list in alphabetical order of all persons thus nominated, indicating the States Parties which have nominated them, and shall submit it to the States Parties. 5. The members of the Committee shall be elected for a term of four years. They shall be eligible for re-election if renominated. However,the term of five of the members elected at the first election shall expire at the end of two years; immediately after the first election the names of these five members shall be chosen by lot by the chairman of the meeting referred to in paragraph 3. 6. If a member of the Committee dies or resigns or for any other cause can no longer perform his Committee duties, the State Party which nominated him shall appoint another expert from among its nationals to serve for the remainder of his term, subject to the approval of the majority of the States Parties. The approval shall be considered given unless half or more of the States Parties respond negatively within six weeks after having been informed by the Secretary-Generalof the United Nations of the proposed appointment. 7. States Parties shall be responsible for the expenses of the members of the Committee while they are in performance of Committee duties. Article 18 1. The Committee shall elect its officers for a term of two years. They may be re-elected. 2. The Committee shall establish its own rules of procedure, but these rules shall provide, inter alia, that 1. Six members shall constitute a quorum; 2. Decisions of the Committee shall be made by a majority vote of the members present. 3. The Secretary-Generalof the United Nations shall provide the necessary staff and facilities for the effective performance of the functions of the Committee under this Convention. 4. The Secretary-Generalof the United Nations shall convene the initial meeting of the Committee. After its initial meeting, the Committee shall meet at such times as shall be provided in its rules of procedure. 5. The State Parties shall be responsible for expenses incurred in connection with the holding of meetings of the States Parties and of the Committee, including reimbursement of the United Nations for any expenses,such as the cost of staff and facilities, incurred by the United Nations pursuant to paragraph 3 above. Article 19 1. The States Parties shall submit to the Committee, through the Secretary-Generalof the United Nations, reports on the measures they have taken to give effect to their undertakings under this Convention, within one year after the entry into force of this Convention for the State Party concerned. Thereafter the States Parties shall submit supplementary reports every four years on any new measures taken,and such other reports as the Committee may request. 2. The Secretary-Generalshall transmit the reports to all States Parties. 3. [Each report shall be considered by the Committee which may make such comments or suggestions on the report as it considers appropriate, and shall forward these to the State Party concerned. That State Party may respond with any observations it chooses to the Committee. 4. The Committee may, at its discretion, decide to include any comments or suggestions made by it in accordance with paragraph 3, together with the observations thereon received from the State Party concerned,in its annual report made in accordance with article 24. If so requested by the State Party concerned, the Committee may also include a copy of the report submitted under paragraph 1.] Article 20 1. If the Committee receives reliable information which appears to it to contain well-founded indications that torture is being systematically practised in the territory of a State Party,the Committee shall invite that State Party to co-operate in the examination of the information and to this end to submit observations with regard to the information concerned. 2. Taking into account any observations which may have been submitted by the State Party concerned as well as any other relevant information available to it, the Committee may, if it decides that this is warranted,designate one or more of its members to make a confidential inquiry and to report to the Committee urgently. 3. If an inquiry is made in accordance with paragraph 2, the Committee shall seek the co-operation of the State Party concerned. In agreement with that State Party,such an inquiry may include a visit to its territory. 4. After examining the findings of its member or members submitted in accordance with paragraph 2, the Committee shall transmit these findings to the State Party concerned together with any comments or suggestions which seem appropriate in view of the situation. 5. All the proceedings of the Committee referred to in paragraphs 1 to 4 of this article shall be confidential, and at all stages of the proceedings the co- operation of the State Party shall be sought. After such proceedings have been completed with regard to an inquiry made in accordance with paragraph 2, the Committee may, after consultations with the State Party concerned,decide to include a summary account

Add a comment

Related pages

police accountability - Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative

Police Accountability in the United Kingdom External ... Written for the Commonwealth Human Rights ... are servants of the Crown.5 Police also have ...
Read more

Office of Constable pamphlet - MPF | Metropolitan Police ...

Office of Constable. The Police Federation is always quick to ... protection of fundamental human rights. It ... Police authorities have a
Read more

Report on Special Constables in Ontario - City of Ottawa

Report on Special Constables in Ontario ... H. Ontario Human Rights Commission and ... A number of cities and their police services boards have ...
Read more

SOUTH AFRICA 2012 Human Rights Report - State

SOUTH AFRICA 2012 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT ... Principal human rights problems included police use of lethal and excessive force, ... The constable, ...
Read more

Police constable experiencing post-traumatic stress ...

Police constable experiencing post ... the protection of the Ontario Human Rights ... policy for police officers who have ...
Read more

Police oath - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

... regard for human rights, ... BTP constables take the same oath as prescribed by the Police Act 1996 for a territorial police constable, ...
Read more

Letter to Major General Kayihura, Inspector General of ...

... and inadequate training for newly deployed special police constables. Human Rights Watch asks ... saying it was too ... have reported human rights ...
Read more

Police powers - the need for investigative powers

A police constable is a citizen ... Individual rights. A list of 16 basic human rights have ... [Balance of individual rights and the need for ...
Read more

Police community support officer - Wikipedia, the free ...

Police Community Support Officer; Police Custody and ... human rights; race and diversity ... PCSOs and police constables have had to take a training ...
Read more

CAIN: 'Powers of the Police' by Brice Dickson: Civil ...

... to rectify human rights abuses. Northern Ireland is the ... police have collected ... her police number and station). The constable must ...
Read more