COMPARATIVE CRIMINAL LAW Introduction

Police and Policing

 Everyone knows what the police are and, probably, thinks that they know what they do.  However, what policing is may be more difficult to explain.

 Police are the institution which carries out most (but not all) of the policing in modern societies.

What do the police do?  Many functions:  Maintain public order E.g., prevent riots, control protests Amateur social worker Dealing with drunk people Mentally ill people Domestic disputes  Investigating crimes

Styles of policing

Lets look at two policing styles: “community policing” and “zero tolerance” policing

Community policing:  Relies on consent and support of community  Interaction between police and public.  Police should ask community members how they can serve them better.

Community policing example: Japan

The Koban:  “[T]hey are a mix between a police station and a post of general assistance.... Koban officers advise on addresses, lend out umbrellas, may act as a lost and found office and often run various community activities. Such activities might involve the production and distribution of local newsletters and the running of classes in self-defense or sports for locals.” Francis Pakes, Comparative Criminal Justice, (Abingdon, 2010) p. 49.

 Some people think that the Koban system is an important reason why the Japanese crime rate is very low.

 This system has been introduced to other Asian countries, such as Singapore.  Other forms of community policing are used or have been introduced in Western countries, with varying degrees of success.  England and Wales have traditionally used a form of community policing.  It is often introduced in US cities where there is a history of some communities distrusting the police.

Zero tolerance policing  The idea of zero tolerance policing started with a magazine article.  In 1982 James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling wrote an article in which they presented their so- called “broken windows” theory.

 “Consider a building with a few broken windows. If the windows are not repaired, the tendency is for vandals to break a few more windows. Eventually, they may even break into the building, and if it's unoccupied, perhaps become squatters or light fires inside. Or consider a sidewalk. Some litter accumulates. Soon, more litter accumulates. Eventually, people even start leaving bags of trash from take-out restaurants there or breaking into cars.” From Wilson, James Q; Kelling, George L (Mar 1982), "Broken Windows: The police and neighborhood safety", The Atlantic, quoted in

 The idea is that if people see broken windows, that isn’t fixed, they will think that no one cares.  They will be encouraged to do more damage. So the damage must be fixed immediately.

Zero tolerance policing example: NYC

 Based on this idea, police in NYC began arresting people for small crimes such as graffiti, panhandling, small-time drug dealing.

 The NYC police had previously ignored many of these crimes because they were focusing on serious crimes.  But the idea behind zero tolerance was that if police responded forcefully and quickly to these small crimes, the way a landlord responded quickly to broken windows, respect for the law would be strengthened and serious crimes would be reduced.

 From , misdemeanor arrests went up 40% and drug arrests 97%  During the same time, serious crimes went down 44%. Pakes, p. 52.

 Many groups and commentators believe that this shows zero tolerance works.  However, others have pointed out that the decrease in crime in NYC started before zero tolerance policing, and have noted that other big American cities had sharp drops in crime during the same years.

 In addition, some have criticized the zero tolerance method for being too aggressive and for targeting the poor and disadvantaged.

 At least one commentator has suggested that the main reason for success in NYC had to do with other changes made at the same time, management changes that made the police more confident and efficient. See: Charles Pollard, Zero Tolerance: Short-term Fix, Long-term Liability? in Norman Dennis, Zero Tolerance: Policing a Free Society (London: The IEA Health and Welfare Unit, 1998) Last accessed on March 12,