Evolution of Knowledge Management within a Law Enforcement Agency - Assignment Example

Knowledge management has played a pivotal role in patrols. The police have been able to use inter-agency communication which has enabled the traffic police to share information with the registration and FBI departments to keep law and order on the roads. The traffic police will share the information with the vehicle registration department to affirm that the vehicles are registered and that they are in good condition. If the vehicle has some registration issues the FBI will have to investigate the issue. This ensures that the law and order are obeyed by the motorists. Inter-agency communication is greatly enhanced in the patrols and it helps to bring order.

The federal rules of criminal procedure forbid the disclosure of matters occurring before a grand jury. This is because of the privacy act of the suspect and the investigation. The violation of the rule may be punished as disrespect to the court. “This is because any violation of the rule can endanger an investigation to the extent that civil litigation may become impossible. The privacy act also provides that any agency which maintains a system of records containing information of a personal nature which is retrieved by name, social security number, or some other identifying number, symbol, or identifying particular, must ensure that administration of the file complies with requirements in the privacy act.” (Anonymous, 2012) The information will only be used by government agencies and it should not be shared with other individuals.

“Normally, the investigatory files are exempted from these requirements by reason of the provision of the act which exempts investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes. In addition, departmental regulations can deny disclosure to anyone, including the individual subject of the record, of information compiled in reasonable anticipation of a civil action or proceeding. At times, another government agency may request documents from EBSA. If there is a Memorandum of Understanding with that agency, the procedures identified in the MOU should be followed. If there is no MOU, the other agency should submit an access request letter to EBSA. If appropriate, the agency and EBSA should execute a common interest agreement”. (Mark, 2013)

The FBI also uses the inter agencies' communication to investigate the crimes that have been committed. Knowledge management ensures that all the records of information are gathered to get the suspects of crime. The FBI will use information from the health institutions, registrar of persons who are both live and dead, vehicle registration departments, and financial institutions to track suspects of crime. Inter-agency communication is important in the FBI to widen the scope of the investigation to get the culprit. The movement of the suspect could be gotten using his financial transactions, health records, and other registrations that are done by the government or other agencies. The information is only shared with government agencies and is not revealed to any other non-government agencies. This is because of the right to privacy which ensures that the individual has privacy until found guilty.

These investigations have been important in the counterterrorism deals that have been able to reduce terrorism to a greater extent. Inter-agency communication has greatly assisted to track the terrorist within and outside the US. This is with the assistance of the INTERPOL agency. With the help of computer networks, the government has been able to link all the government agencies to make the investigation easy and fast with a click of a mouse. The use of inter-agency communication has helped to fight terrorism to a great extent.

“U.S. Supreme Court has noted that several federal appeals courts have relied on the consultant corollary in allowing documents prepared for government agencies by outside parties to qualify as an intra-agency memorandum. As the Court explained, the court's rationale in these cases is that “the records submitted by outside consultants played essentially the same part in an agency's process of deliberation as documents prepared by agency personnel might have done.”  (Mark, 2013)

Normally, in communications with an agency that constitutes an intra-agency, the court has several factors relevant to this inquiry. “If an agency seeks to withhold documents exchanged with a non-agency based on the consultant corollary, you should argue that each factor favors a finding that the non-agency party is acting in its own or another’s interest, rather than advising the agency in the same manner that the agency’s employees would. First, as the U.S. Supreme Court explained, the consultant must not represent an interest of its own, or another client, when it advises the agency that hires it. For that reason, where non-agency parties communicate with the agency on their own the consultant corollary likely does not exist. Second, a non-agency party does not act as a consultant to the agency in situations where it self-advocates at the expense of others seeking benefits inadequate to satisfy everyone. The Court emphasized a vital question whether the purpose of the third party’s communications was to obtain an agency decision to support a claim necessarily adverse to the interests of competitors.” (Mark, 2013)

In conclusion, it is evident that knowledge management within law enforcement has enhanced inter and intra-agency communication significantly.