Law Enforcement as a Profession - Essay Example

Law Enforcement as a Profession Introduction Law enforcement officials refer to all appointed and/or elected officers of the law who exercise police powers, specifically, the powers of arrest or detention. This definition extends to countries and areas where police powers are exercised and performed by military authorities and/ or State forces. (Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, 1997) As the term implies, the law enforcement officials’ main duty is the imposition of law and order in the community. This duty is performed in a variety of ways, depending on the size and type of the officials’ organization and on their respective jurisdictions. In general though, these officials are tasked to fight and arrest criminals, investigate and collect evidence for prosecution, testify in courts, come up with written detailed reports and attend to the needs of the community in crisis and emergency situations. (Police Officer, 2004) This essay discusses the basic requirements required for this profession, the code of conduct that each of the official should be observing, and some samples of the ever-present ethical dilemmas that the people in this profession usually deal with. Education and Training Requirements The educational requirements needed to start a career as a law enforcement officer varies from each country and area. In some small communities, high school education is the only requirement. However, majority of areas nowadays require an individual to undergo formal job training, which includes, but not limited to, taking up of courses in criminal investigation, administration, criminal justice system, corrections, community relations and even the study of criminal law. (Police Officer, 2004) These educational requirements should be coupled with special skills and other qualifications in order for an aspiring individual to become a law enforcement officer. Special skill requirements usually include above-average communication, judgment, decision-making and listening skills. In some areas, special driving skills, knowledge in accounting, computers, weapons, business and even foreign languages are a plus factor. On top of these are the rigorous physical and personal qualifications that an individual should possess. (Police Officer, 2004) Officers are usually provided with additional training before they are given their first assignments. A typical training involves classroom instructions on law, civil rights and accident investigation; and supervised experience in patrol, traffic control, firearm and ammunition usage, self-defense, first aid and emergency response. (Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2007) Although law enforcers have variety of tasks, they are all tasked to conduct their duties in accordance with certain common codes of conduct, one of which is discussed below. A Discussion of the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials The United Nations (UN) Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials was adopted by the UN General Assembly Resolution 34/169 of December 17, 1979. This resolution states that the role and functions of law enforcement in upholding public order, and the way by which those functions are exercised, have direct impact on the quality of lives of all people and of the society in which they live in. The Assembly likewise emphasized that as much as the work and duties of law enforcement officers are important to the community, such nature of work is also vulnerable to abuse and misuse. (Use and Application of the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, Including the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms, 1997) Below is a detailed discussion of the eight articles of the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials: (Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, 1997) The first article of the Code discusses the main duty of the law enforcement officers, that is, to serve the community and protect the people from any form of illegal act. It further qualifies who are considered as law enforcement officers, and states that the Code covers the full range of prohibitions under penal decrees. The second article indicates that the officers should respect and protect human dignity, as well as maintain and espouse the human rights of every person. The human rights being referred to are identified and defended by various national and international laws. Among the international edicts that recognize and advocate human rights are the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Article 3 is all about the use of force by law enforcement officials. It confers that such officials should use force only when the situation dictates its necessity; the degree of which is dependent on what is required for the performance of their duty. This means that the officers should only resort to using force only when it is reasonably necessary to do so, and the exertion of force should be proportional to the legitimate objective that is being achieved. This article also states that the use of firearms is already an extreme measure. Firearms should only be used when the offender offers armed resistance or endangers the lives of other people, and when less intense measures are no longer enough to contain or arrest the suspect. It likewise provides that whenever a firearm is used, a report referring to this instance should be promptly submitted to the authorities. The fourth article is considered to be the confidentiality clause of the Code, as it provides that the law enforcement officials should exercise utmost care and discretion in safeguarding, using and disclosing any obtained information about the private lives of others. Article 5 provides that no law enforcement official should engage in any form of physical or mental torture, and other degrading and inhuman treatment or punishment. Such acts are considered to be a violation of the human rights. Article 6 states that all officials should take charge in protecting the health of every person under their custody and that, whenever necessary, should immediately obtain medical attention for them. This also applies for victims of law violations and during accidents that occur in the course of law violation. The seventh article prohibits the law enforcement officers from committing any act of corruption while opposing and combating such acts. While the specific and detailed definitions of corruption are dependent on national laws, corruption covers any act that has to do with responding to gifts, incentives and/ or promises which is either the result or cause of improper discharge of duties. The last article provides that all in all, law enforcement officials should give respect to the law and to the Code while opposing any violations of such. It also states that the officials have the responsibility to report to appropriate authorities any violations or probable violations of the Code. Ethical Dilemmas of Law Enforcement Officials The abovementioned Code of Conduct seems to be all ‘black and white”. However, in the daily lives of law enforcement officers, a lot of “gray areas” appear. Such gray areas in the workplace and in the field produce dilemmas that test the ethics of the law enforcers. Ethical dilemmas can be compared to fatal encounters—they come at the most inopportune and unexpected times. Such dilemmas are part of the daily grind of all law enforcement officials for they thrive and work in a social context that is full of ethical conflicts. When caught unaware or unprepared, even the most honest officers could make careless and inappropriate ethical decisions that could bring about life-changing repercussions. A law enforcer should therefore be prepared not just for tactical encounters, but also for ethical predicaments. (Gilmartin & Harris, 1998) The following are concise descriptions of examples of ethical dilemmas that every law enforcer encounters. Law enforcers are usually caught up with the dilemma of discretion. In this kind of dilemma, an officer faces several choices of action which all seem to be right. In a certain discussion involving some law enforcement officers, they have mentioned that in cases wherein this kind of dilemma is involved, most of them are either uncomfortable with what the law or rules require them to do, or are simply confused on as to what are the appropriate actions should be. An example given with regards to this dilemma is a scenario involving a police officer stopping a woman due to her traffic warrants. At that time though, the woman involved has her baby with her. The officer was confused if he is going to stick with the so-called “strict legality” or be flexible and considerate of the woman and her infant. Simply put, this dilemma evolves around the question of what is the best thing to be done, given a certain circumstance or problem at hand. (Becker & Pollock, 1996) Another example is the “entitlement” dilemma. Gilmartin and Harris (1998) defined entitlement as a “we deserve special treatment” kind of mentality imbibed by law enforcement officers. In a more specific sense, this is a mindset that makes the law enforcers think that many rules do not apply to them. An example mentioned is an off-duty officer who breaks traffic laws by exceeding the imposed speed limit, who at the same time is confident that his position and profession exempt him from being caught and reprimanded. This dilemma could also be described as a state of confusion among the law enforcers with regards to “doing the right thing” vs. “doing what they think is right”. This sense of entitlement can be changed by cultivating an environment that promotes both organizational and individual accountability. (Gilmartin & Harris, 1998) Another common dilemma that officers encounter in their careers is that which involves money. Tapscott (2006) mentioned in his article entitled “Police Ethics”, that a big number of officers perceive that they are underpaid and are thus deserving of higher compensation. This kind of perception plus the fact that officers are always exposed in scenarios which involve handling money makes the “money dilemma” as one of the most “tempting” situations to indulge into. (Tapscott, 2006) Connected to this are the circumstances that involve gratuities. Although many civilians nowadays consider these as among the most pressing problems that involve the law enforcers, still, many officers think that there is nothing wrong with accepting gratuities. One reason for this perception is the blurry line of distinction between “true gratuities” and “gifts”. True gratuities can be defined as something that is given to officers as a matter of policy, while gifts are given to officers in exchange for some action. (Becker and Pollock, 1996) This gray area indeed presents dilemma to most of our law enforcers nowadays. The last example of an ethical dilemma is the utilization of informants in developing criminal intelligence. In an article entitled “Ethical Approaches for Police Officers when Working with Informants in the Development of Criminal Intelligence in the United Kingdom”, it was mentioned that although the use of informants is laden with so many complex ethical issues, officers still engage in this kind of practice due to the pressing need to produce quality criminal intelligence. This practice is therefore becoming a proactive approach to policing in spite of the ethical difficulties it presents. (Cooper & Murphy, 1997) Given these, it could be said the facing and dealing with ethical dilemmas involving law enforcement officers are not easy tasks. An environment of impeccable ethics, if this is to be fostered, requires comprehensive strategies that involve the organization as a whole and the officers as unique individuals. These strategies should entail informing and teaching the law enforcers on as what areas are within and beyond their control. This way, they could be made aware that as much as they could not control their roles, they do have complete control over their integrity and professionalism. (Gilmartin & Harris, 1998) References Becker, R. & Pollock, J. (1996). Ethics Training Using Officers’ Dilemmas. The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. Retrieved August 4 2008 from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2194/is_n11_v65/ai_19017622/pg_4?tag= artBody; col1 Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials. (1997). United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Retrieved August 4, 2008 from http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/h_comp42.htm Cooper, P. & Murphy, J. (1997). Ethical Approaches for Police Officers when Working with Informants in the Development of Criminal Intelligence in the United Kingdom. Journal of Social Policy, 26, pp 1-20 doi:10.1017/S0047279496004886 Retrieved August 4, 2008 from http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=27707 Gilmartin, K. & Harris, J. (1998). Law Enforcement Ethics…the Continuum of Compromise. Police Chief Magazine. Retrieved August 4, 2008 from http://www.rcmp-learning.org/docs/ecdd1222.htm Occupational Outlook Handbook. (2007, December 18). Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieve August 4, 2008 from http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos160.htm Police Officer. Criminal Justice USA. Retrieved August 4, 2008 from http://www.criminaljusticeusa.com/police-officer.html Tapscott, K. (2006, September 27). Police Ethics. Article City. Retrieved August 4 2008 from http://www.articlecity.com/articles/politics_and_government/article_300.shtml Use and Application of the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, Including the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms. (1997, July 30). United Nations Crime and Justice Information Network. Retrieved August 4, 2008 from http://www.uncjin.org/Standards/Conduct/conduct.html Read More