Police Corruption

Police Corruption

What, precisely, is the moral issue?

The moral issue presented in this paper is with regard to police corruption. The moral question is – To what extent should police officers accept grauities?

Possible answers to the issue as stated

There are several arguments that have been put forth in support of police officers accepting gratuities. The first argument is that gratuities are reasonable and natural ways of showing appreciation to police officers and it would be rude to refuse. Second, it is contended that gratuities are not sufficient to cultivate favor. Third, no personal feeling of obligation develops in a situation where the gratuities are offered officially by a corporation or company. The fourth argument is that gratuities are part and parcel of promoting tight connections with the community which results in a fundamental of “good policing”. Lastly, it is argued that prohibition of acceptance of gratuities means that police officers are not trustworthy in exercising discretion and are not capable of making sensible moral judgments to guide their conduct (Delattre, 2011).

There are also various arguments in opposition to acceptance of gratuities. The first argument is that a regularized gift creates a feeling of obligation, no matter how small it may be. Another argument is that gratuities result in a slippery slope in situations where the temptations become increasingly larger while refusal becomes more difficult. It is also argued that not all officers are capable of exercising appropriate judgment on what is reasonable to accept, and it would be better for the organization to remove the temptation altogether. Lastly, businesses which offer gratuities always intend to get preferential treatment in terms of favors, and this implies compromising one’s duties and public trust for personal favors (Delattre, 2011).

What considerations should be brought to bear on the issue’s possible answers, and what judgments about those answers follow from these considerations?

Barker (2011) claims that the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics is sufficient enough to guide police officers make correct choices. From this perspective, a police officer is not expected to allow his personal interests to override the principles provided under the Code. This point of view attempts to posit that corruption can be controlled if all individuals are driven by rule-following rather than wise judgment.

Delattre (2011) and Rich (2011) propose that the Code is not a sufficient guideline to the police officers in making ethical choices. As such, controlling corruption involves proper assessment of candidates, advancement in education for hired officers, good leadership, and integrity. From this point of view, the conduct of police officers is influenced by many factors in the department which are capable of hampering his wise judgment, swaying him away from the Code, and directing him towards corrupt behavior.

The first consideration in controlling corruption is with regard to recruitment. It has been recommended that higher recruitment and screening standards are relevant in gauging the ethical conduct of prospective candidates (Newburn, 1999). A 1997 Commission on Police Integrity which studied corruption in Chicago recommended that the background of all candidates must be screened. In addition, polygraph testing must be used in the initial screening of prospective police officers. Furthermore, the agencies should seek candidates having higher education levels, while those who seek further education once hired must be rewarded (Newburn, 1999).

The second consideration is the relevance of training in eradicating police corruption. Newburn (1999) notes that most law enforcement training usually avoids discussing corruption. The rationale behind this avoidance is that discussion of wrongdoing is inherently displeasing and increases the chances of individuals engaging in such behavior. In cases where training also involves discussion of ethics, Newburn remarks that the discussion is mostly conducted in a manner that fails to resonate with new recruits or make much difference to consequent behavior. This trait was also evident in the 1990s as the Wood Commission found that some recruit trainings rarely concentrated on integrity or ethics and did not have any aspect of practical guidance or application (Newburn, 1999). Furthermore, the available instruction was always inappropriate, with new recruits being mentored in department sections which were most prevalent in corruption. In this regard, though the Code might have all general guidance as to what is expected, a police officer may soon forget about the his duty to the public and get swayed by the culture in the department in case corruption is condoned by other officers.  There is a straightforward connection between corruption, competence, and training. Police agencies which sufficiently train their officers, and offer them necessary resources to achieve their goals legitimately experience less instances of corruption (Newburn, 1999).

The third consideration is the effectiveness of leadership. Leadership plays a very significant role in controlling corruption (Newburn, 1999). Consequently, police leaders hold the overall responsibility for its shortcomings. In the same way, these leaders can greatly contribute to the success of the agency. While working toward departmental goals, the police leadership plays a major role in creating the institutional climate. Leaders who keep high standards of ethical behavior are capable of serving as the key to prevention of corruption and maintenance of public trust. Fighting corruption involves great understanding of the nature, scope and organization of the existing corruption. Without such knowledge, efforts to fight it may be futile.

Another consideration is the police subculture (Newburn, 1999). The policing profession has a subculture to itself. With regard to corruption, the police subculture is capable of either preventing the existence of corruption, or providing a platform for the its spread throughout a department. The subculture may be the most difficult to tackle in case corruption has taken root in the department. This way, though the officer may have passed background screening and declared to abide by the Code, he or she is more likely to be maintaining loyalty to his peers than his integrity.

A subculture encompasses a unit of individuals who generally share beliefs, values, assumptions, perceptions, attitudes, traditions, and ways of doing things (Rich, 2011). Owing to the fact that policing usually involves numerous experiences peculiar to the field, the subculture is capable of becoming stronger that a police officer’s family bonds. In addition, work schedules away from the ordinary realm may result in feelings of isolation which further strengthens the subculture ties. Most departments allow senior officers to test new recruits on issues of corruption. For instance, they may want to gauge the amiability of the new recruits to taking gratuities. As Delattre (2011) notes, such practices are gateways to more grave corruption due to the fact that they provide opportunities for corrupt intent. Acceptance of the free cup of coffee, the example frequently used, may lead to a slippery slope where the officer is swayed into taking greater gratuities and compromising their integrity.

The theory of rotten apples also indicates that police new police recruits who are naturally deviant and would not want to follow the law may cause danger to the rest of the officers. Such people always get into the system with concealed character, and when they adapt into the subculture, they are capable of spoiling other officers by influencing them the wrong way. Their deviance character makes them have utter disrespect to the badge and their duty to the public. This accounts to many crimes being committed by police officers who are entrusted with protecting the public.

The Law Enforcement Code of Ethics provides that a police officer must recognize the badge of his office as a symbol of public trust, and that he should never engage in bribery, nor excuse such practices by other police officers. A police officer declares his cooperation with all legally authorized agencies in seeking for justice. According to Barker, the Code of Ethics starts with a sequence of mission statements which seem difficult for most mortal individuals to live up to (Barker, 2011).

Police officers, as the most visible representatives of the formal social control framework as well as well as agents of a democratic society, are granted special trust. Due to the power and authority entrusted in them by the badge, they are usually expected to engage in ethical and lawful behavior. The public expects the officers to deal appropriately with any unethical and unlawful behavior by other police officers. The special relationship that police officers have with the public is what causes their unethical conduct extremely disturbing and grave. The officer who conforms to the Code acknowledges and appreciates this special relationship (Barker, 2011).

The Code also provides two limitations on the extent to which a police officer can use his powers or authority. First, it is not right for the officer to breach the Constitution and other laws while performing his work. Second, the officer is prohibited from using his office for personal gain or profit, and accepting any favors which place his personal advantage above public welfare (Barker, 2011).

The Code also states that a police officer must be personally committed in ensuring observance of the Code and professional performance. Accordingly Barker argues that peer pressure cannot be faulted for non-conformance with the Code. The police officer must be held personally liable for unethical conduct, as well as for condoning unethical conduct by other officers (Barker, 2011).

According to Delattre (2011), though the Code is trustworthy as a general guideline which conveys the spirit of faithfulness to the public trust, it cannot assume the position of wisdom and good character. By pinning on a police badge, it implies that one has voluntarily agreed to bear the public trust. The police officer is entrusted to protect the rights and safety of other members of the public. In order to offer the protection, the police officer is granted special powers and authority. Police officers are authorized to conduct investigations on the people, apply force where necessary, and abridge ordinary liberties of the people.

Delattre (2011) points out that in some cases, citizens usually offer officers favors in the hope for preferential treatment at a later time. Police officers who take up the favors cause dishonor to themselves and the badge. Beyond this requirement, police officers are expected to use their personal qualities to their work which the badge does not offer. Major qualities include common decency and common sense.

Police officers should avoid exposing themselves vulnerably to danger. They are supposed to maintain their skillfulness and physical fitness while using their tools of work. They should be attentive to the needs of the people they serve (Delattre, 2011).

Significant progress has been made in the law enforcement profession over the past few decades (Rich, 2011). First, most police agencies have made efforts to avoid hiring prospective police officers with low ethical standards and identify employed officers early in their careers who are capable of compromising the integrity of the department. Furthermore, new discoveries have been made with regard to testing the psychological propensity of candidates to act ethically. Nonetheless, unethical conduct is persistent in police departments small and large. Police corruption undermines the general legitimacy of law enforcement. Theories on a person’s own natural vulnerability to get involved in unethical conduct, the negative influence of an officer’s department, and the place of the public in law enforcement, have been proposed as explanations of police corruption.

According to Rich (2011), the best approach for eradicating corruption should be making sure that unethical individuals are not hired. He proposes that agencies should ensure sufficient screening of candidates and hiring of most conscientious individuals due to the fact that they have a higher degree of integrity.  Rich (2011) and Delattre (1996) differ with Baker’s position that the Code is enough to eradicate police misconduct. According to Rich (2011) and Delattre (2011), ethical conduct cannot just be a matter of personal commitment; it is an issue requiring departmental commitment.

Delattre (2011) argues that the dominant system in police departments makes it difficult to effectively implement professionalism. The hierarchical nature and the tight chain of formal accountability encourage a perception that rules must be followed strictly, without considering wise judgment. This makes officers more concerned about internal consequences of their decisions rather than their appropriateness. To this extent, it is hard to attain and sustain professionalism in policing.

Conclusion

Police officers ought to be guided by both the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics and their wise judgment. In this regard, they should not accept gratuities completely because they are capable of causing them dire consequences through the slippery slope.

 References

Barker, T. (2011). Police Ethics: Crisis in Law Enforcement. Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

Delattre, E.J. (2011). Character and Cops: Ethics in Policing. AEI Press.

Newburn, T. (1999). Understanding and preventing police corruption: lessons from the literature. Research Development Statistics.

Rich, M. M. S. (2011). Police Corruption: An analytical tool into police ethics. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. Retrieved on October 30, 2013 from: http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/may_2011/law_enforcement_professionalism

 

 

 

 

Last Completed Projects

Are you looking for a similar paper or any other quality academic essay? Then look no further. Our research paper writing service is what you require. Our team of experienced writers is on standby to deliver to you an original paper as per your specified instructions with zero plagiarism guaranteed. This is the perfect way you can prepare your own unique academic paper and score the grades you deserve.

Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.

[order_calculator]