Ethically Sound Law Enforcement in the 21st Century

The known history of pure ethics or ethical theories begins with ancient Greek philosophers (Sophists, Socrates, Socratic schools, Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Stoics) and after being recovered by early English positivists has been the main topic of discussions in the Medieval times in Europe. As the scholastic doctrines are by-passed (therefore Christian Ethics is not a scientific term anymore), we come to the illuminated times after the Medieval, and continue with Hobbes, the Father of Modern Ethics (Rogers, 2012).

As with most theories and concepts, ethics, and the understanding of ethics evolved into many forms of both application and understanding long before it became a term commonly associated with law enforcement. As it relates to today’s understanding, the name most commonly recognized concerning modern day ethical understanding is Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) (Rogers, 2012). Kant was one of the most renowned German philosophers of his day. Kant spent much of his time studying ethical principles and describing how they pertain to modern, current day ethical dilemmas. Kant was a follower of both the Intuitionists and Naturalists. Kant believed that duty, and self-awareness were two of the most important motivators for ethical compliance. Kant said, “The only good thing is the “good will”, and the principle of action that ought to be obeyed by all rational beings, under all circumstances and for its own sake” (Rogers, 2012). This principle of action is adopted by the person, and not the laws which are independent of the person (Rogers, 2012).

Kant may have been referring to our “good will” as being our inner conscious, or gut feelings on doing what we know is the right thing to do. The basic, most fundamental ethical dilemma, good v/s evil. It is easy for one to see how ethical principles can relate to every area of life, especially our working environments.

The law enforcement ethics conversation first begins around the development of the Modern Metropolitan Police, and the development of the “Peelian Principles” by Sir Robert Peel (Peak, 2016). In 1829, Sir Robert Peel was instrumental in the foundation of the Metropolitan Police Act, which created was is commonly referred to as the first modern day law enforcement agency (Peak, 2016). Peel founded the nine Peelian Principles; 1. The basic mission for which police exist is to prevent crime and disorder as an alternative to the repression of crime and disorder by military force and severity of legal punishment. 2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police existence, actions, behavior and the ability of the police to secure and maintain public respect. 3. The police must secure the willing cooperation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain public respect. 4. The degree of cooperation of the public that can be secured diminishes, proportionately, to the necessity for the use of physical force and compulsion in achieving police objectives. 5. The police seek and preserve public favor, not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to the law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws; by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of society without regard to their race or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humor; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life. 6. The police should use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to achieve police objectives; and police should use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective. 7. The police at all times should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police are the only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the intent of the community welfare. 8. The police should always direct their actions toward their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary by avenging individuals or the state, or authoritatively judging guilt or punishing the guilty. 9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them (Greenberg & Gordon, 1990).

While all the nine principles do not directly relate to ethical standards, or law enforcement ethics, they are all grounded is an ethical sense. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police existence, actions, behavior and the ability of the police to secure and maintain public respect. While that is a Peelian Principle, it is also a relatable statement to current day law enforcement. Law enforcement's success is directly related to this ninth principle, and the public's approval of law enforcement, and how they conduct business. As Kant said, “obeyed by all rational beings, under all circumstances and for its own sake”, it goes without saying that law enforcement is to be included within the all rational beings’ category (Rogers, 2012). Furthermore, I submit that law enforcement officers should be above rational, above minimal, and overly ethical. Law enforcement should hold itself to an ethical standard that is inconceivable to members of the public. If this were to become the standard operating procedure, law enforcement and the public would never be on opposite sides of any issue again.

There were many ethical bombshells that landed within the law enforcement communities within the early nineteen hundreds to the late nineteen seventies’, but none were more famous than the Serpico incident and the creation of the Knapp Commission (Bratton & Knobler, 1998). The Knapp commission was founded by then New York City Mayor Mr. John Lindsay, to investigate police corruption within New York City. Frank Serpico, a New York plainclothes Police Officer had recently gone on record describing in great detail bribery, pay-offs, and corruption. The Commission was formed from the citizens of New York City, and they took two years to complete their investigation (Bratton & Knobler, 1998). One of the most important issues that come out of the commission’s findings, was that there was a culture problem as much as a criminal problem within the police department. The commission’s investigation revealed that police officers in the City of New York had fallen into the culture of us v/s them, and their loyalty to each other outweighed their ethical commitments to themselves (Bratton & Knobler, 1998). Once realized, it would take years to repair this issue, and many other cities would suffer a similar fate. Cities like Los Angeles, Boston, Chicago, and New Orleans have all had similar scandals, and similar cultures (Bratton & Knobler, 1998). The consequences of this unethical behavior have not been limited to only those agencies, but law enforcement has suffered tremendous loss of respect by the communities they serve across the country (Greenberg & Gordon, 1990).

A leader’s humility must grow with the passing of years (Sanders, 1994). This truth is something that law enforcement leaders have failed to instill within the ranks of law enforcement agencies across the country. The way back from scandal, and a loss of trust is a long and hard journey. Law enforcement leadership, must begin realizing the importance of strong ethical foundations, at all levels within the agencies they lead. Covey discusses being proactive as an effective habit (Covey, 1989). Being proactive means to be engaged, to be intentional, not sitting and waiting for disaster to strike, but to head off trouble before it starts. Law enforcement leaders must approach their responsibilities with this successful habit in mind. Law enforcement must come to realize that the narrative is their responsibility. In other words, the current law enforcement narrative is damaged concerning ethics, its law enforcement responsibility to see that narrative is changed. The replacement must be an example of ethics in the highest form, law enforcement must re-claim its ethical respect from the public. The process to see that this happens begins by law enforcement becoming the epitome of an ethical example for all professions. Example, whether it be good or bad, has a powerful influence (Gingrich & Forstchen, 2011). Law enforcement leaders must ensure that the example they set is a good, positive, strong, and motivational one for the public to use as their standard.

Thomas Peters, one of the most renowned leadership authors says that Many of the innovative companies operating today got their best product ideas from customers they serve. That information, and knowledge comes from actively, and intentionally listening to your customers (Peters, 2015). This principle is not only for private businesses, but for law enforcement agencies as well. Many agencies have committees that are made from the community, and those committees serve as advisory groups. This is an excellent way for law enforcement leadership to hear from their constituency, their customers. Concerns about the ethical principles of an agency will more than likely reveal themselves during this process. Once it’s on the table, dialogue can begin to fix and address the issue. It starts with a leader who is willing to take this first, important critical step towards rebuilding the relationship.

In his book, Spiritual Leadership; Principles of Excellence for every Believer, J. Oswald Sanders says “Courageous leaders face unpleasant and even devastating situations with equanimity, then act firmly to bring good from trouble, even if their action is unpopular. Leadership always faces natural human inertia and opposition. But courage follows through with a task until it is done.” (Sanders, 1994). There are few quotes that summarize ethical law enforcement leadership like this one does. Law Enforcement has the duty, the obligation to be the ethical leaders within their communities. Law enforcement are on the front line of the ethical war more so than any other profession. This importance, this sense of duty, does not rest solely with law enforcement leaders. Line level law enforcement is as much responsible for this duty, as chiefs and sheriffs are. The law enforcement professional that are working the streets, answering the calls, solving problems, they are the torch bearers for the ethical perceptions the public has of the profession.

For the perception of ethics and how it relates to law enforcement to change, it will take effort on both sides of the equation. The public also must realize their important role in this process. The task is tough, it will be hard to complete, but it is work that is worth doing.

References

Bratton, W., & Knobler, P. (1998). Turnaround: how Americas top cop reversed the crime epidemic. New York: Random House.

Covey, S. R. (1989). The seven habits of highly effective people: restoring the character ethic. Franklin Covey.

Gingrich, N., & Forstchen, W. R. (2011). Valley Forge. New York: Thomas Dunne.

Greenberg, R., & Gordon, A. (1990). Let’s Take Back Our Streets! Chicago: Contemporary Books.

Peak, K. J. (2016). Justice administration: police, courts, and corrections management. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (2015). In search of excellence: lessons from Americas best-run companies. London: Profile Books.

Rogers, R. A. (2012). A short history of ethics, Greek and modern. Memphis: General Books

Sanders, J. O. (1994). Spiritual leadership: principles of excellence for every believer. Chicago: Moody Press.