Legitimacy and the Main Role of the Police - Literature review Example

? Legitimacy refers to an action that is recognized by law and some scholars define is as a form ofundisputed credibility. Various scholars have written concerning this issue of legitimacy and among them includes John Locke who gives it a political approach (Bentley, 1998 ). He defines political legitimacy as universal acceptance of a governing law such as an authority whose functions is to protect the society by enacting laws and providing services that are meant for the benefits of the society. According to Locke, a British Scholar (Bentley, 1998), legitimacy is a system of power and he defines power as a sphere of influence. Therefore, for effective governing, an institution has to acquire political legitimacy as this is necessary to prevent the collapse of the government due to various legal setbacks that governs the state. However, there are some political systems that survive despite illegitimately acquiring power. This institution usually seeks the support of individuals who hold influential positions in the society and thereby considering such systems as legitimate despite opposition from the wider mass. Locke further argues that legitimacy comes from the popular consent of the people and without it, any institution formed and operating is illegitimate. Dolf Stanberger defines legitimacy as a foundation of an existence of governmental power with the knowledge of officials of government that they have a right to govern for the benefits of the people (Alderson, 1979). An author by the name of Seymour Martins disagrees with the definitions of Locke and Stanberger on legitimacy. He argues that legitimacy involves a belief by the ruling class that the practiced system of governance is the best and he does not involve the masses as in his definition (Blumberg, 1983). Legitimacy encompasses morality and scholars of moral philosophy define it as the normative position given to the government and other institutions operating in the country by the masses on the acceptance that they use their authority in accordance to the law. Scholars of law distinguish legitimacy from legality. They argue that a government can be legitimate in its composition but they actions can be illegal, for example implementing a budget without parliament’s approval. The police is an organ of the government and its main function is to maintain law and order. In conducting their operations there are always aspects of legitimacy in question. Are they acting within the law or are they violating the same law they are supposed to implement. This paper seeks to analyze legitimacy in the contest of a specific police function. The police function identified is maintenance of law and order in England and Wales (Miyazawa, 1995). In talking about this role, it will highlight its different aspects and how it defines the concept of legitimacy in England and wales. The questions that this paper seeks to answer are two fold, What is legitimacy? How does the police role of maintaining law and order define the concepts of legitimacy in England and Wales? This paper has a concluder which basis its analysis from the research done and it explains other concepts of legitimacy. The main role of the police force is to maintain law and order and in order to function appropriately; the police need public help and support and it’s of great use to them when such support is voluntary and sincere. Such voluntary support from the public comes from the notion of legitimacy. The society has to acknowledge the roles of the police as outlined by the laws governing the state and if police action contravenes these laws, they will lose legitimacy and therefore getting cooperation from the people becomes difficult. One of the main reasons as to why people agree to cooperate with the police is because they enjoy legal recognition and therefore people view them as a legitimate authority to be obeyed. The public are also concerned with the manner in which the police execute their functions and from their conclusions and analysis, they give judgment on the legitimacy of the police operations. Such evaluations are central in public-police relations and influence their assessment of the police in conducting their functions of maintaining law and order. It is therefore important for the police force to follow all legal channels in executing their duties as this will enhance its level of acceptance among the public and therefore acquiring legitimacy. Once they are acceptable to the public, they will effectively conduct their functions. The state has the right of using violence to implement its laws, and this right is given to the police. Max Weber argues that the state has the legitimate right of using violence and its instruments of violence are the police and the military men (Clark, 2005). When the police use force to maintain law and order, Weber calls it legitimate physical coercion and it should only be used for enforcing law and order in the society (Fennel, 1995). If a state uses force to enforce activities that are against the law, then it loses its legitimate right to use force as the force used is not for the maintenance of law and order but for serving selfish purposes. The use of force by the police service is a delegation from the state, and such authority has passed various legislative measures that legitimize the operations of the police in using force, therefore gaining public acceptance. In England and Wales, the process of legitimization of force is found in various statutes and laws that define the operations of police officers. The followings are the various laws and statutes that legitimize the operations of the police force in this Nation. Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act, 2011 Serious Organized Crime and 2005 Police Reform Act, 2002 Police Act 1996 Police Act of 1984 Police Act of 1964 The police, according to the Police and Criminal Evidence act of 1984, have the legitimacy to use deception to get confessions to be used for arrests. By using this means allowed by law, it can be said that the police officers performed their legitimate duty of arresting offenders and therefore maintaining law and order (Hess, 2006). Law enforcement officers in England and Wales possess legitimate powers to arrest criminals in other countries which they are not operating in. Legally, there are four methods in which they can invoke such powers and they are, Arresting a criminal without an arrest warrant for a criminal activity done in the police officers country. Arresting a criminal with an arrest warrant. Arresting a suspected criminal for an offense committed in another country without an arresting warrant. Mutual aid in arresting criminals. By law, constables in England can implement certain warrants of arrests even if they are not operating in their areas of jurisdiction. When carrying out an arrest warrant issued in England and Wales, a constable by law, can use reasonable force to enforce the arrest warrant. Part 139 of the Criminal Justice and Public order act allows this as a result, constable enjoys legitimacy in law enforcement. Under England and Wales laws, a constable can arrest a criminal who has committed a crime in his country without a warrant of arrest (Bailey, 1981). These powers are derived from part 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence act. An individual arrested under this conditions, is to be taken to the nearby police post in which the offence is under investigation and if detained, it shall last for less than six hours. The British law, under part 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act of 1984 legitimizes the arrest of criminals who have committed a crime in a foreign country by British constables (Fennel, 1995). This act of 1984 has different sections that outline the conduct of constables while making an arrest. Section 28 of the acts outlines the need of a constable to inform a criminal on why he/she is arrested, section 32 gives the constable powers to search a criminal on any in criminative materials, and section 30 requires him to take the arrested person to a designated police center. While carrying out their duty of maintaining law and order, various units of the police force support one another while on a large scale operation, that requires special skills or experience that the host police unit cannot provide. This assistance is denoted as mutual aid and officers providing assistance in the named condition enjoy the same privileges and powers as the same officers in the host unit. A constable performing the roles of a prison warden retains all the authority and honors his office enjoys (Laser, 2004). Under the British Terrorism Act of 2000, a constable in England and Wales has legitimate powers to arrest a person on suspicions of Terrorism. This is found in Section 41 of the Terrorism act. The constable has the authority to initiate or stop a search on a suspected terrorist and these powers are given to them under part 43 of the terrorism act. Due to these laws, it can be said that constables in England and Wales enjoy legitimate powers of arresting and detaining suspected terrorists for maintaining law and order. There are other police officers who are constables and yet they do not serve in the police force. They obtain their legitimacy from the laws outlined in the Harbors, Docks, and Piers Clauses Act of 1847, section 79, (Blumenberg, 1993) companies can hire constables for maintaining law and order on any property belonging to the organization. These laws are operational in England and Wales, and constable employed by these organizations, possess similar powers and authority as constable in the police force, since this act of 1847 legitimized their operations. Police behavior plays a significant role in enhancing its legitimacy and the relationship between the police and the citizens on a wider scale. On most occasions, the police are always associated with formation of social groups and classes in selective administration of justice and policing. This aspect of their behavior erodes their public acceptance and cooperation thus undermining their legitimacy (Fitzgerald, 1983). Scholars argue that fairness in the police officers action in dealing with the public is an important process of enhancing their legitimacy. Fairness promotes a sense of belonging and therefore enhances cooperation, which is an important element of legitimacy from the public. In the middle 1970s to 1980s, the police adopted a more militaristic style of operation in Britain. This paramilitary style of police operation reduced the legitimacy of the police force in England since some of their operations were against the law and they attracted numerous law suits from the British citizens (Elliot and Quinn, 2008). This led to an even more militaristic style of policing. In 1990s, the police department of England changed their modes of operation and introduced community policing methods that involved the British citizens. This was an attempt by the police force to increase their legitimacy in England and correct the mistakes of the yester years. To properly define legitimacy, legality has to be considered. The operations of the police in England and therefore, in England and Wales, legitimacy is an action that is recognized and known as correct and proper in regard to British laws and legal procedures (Hulls, 2005). Legitimacy is understood as approval and recognition by the public of an action. The action taken needs to be done by an authority that has political and legal recognition and therefore, the public will accept its consequences. In England and Wales, there are three kinds of legitimacy, Rational-Legal Legitimacy This type of legitimacy involves an organizational procedure, which is funded and maintained by the Government (Rohr, 1986). These institutions enact and enforce statutes for the advantage of the community and therefore it is through the public that the government obtains legitimacy in its actions. The role of police in maintaining law and order is an example of this legitimacy. The police work for the advantage of the community and once they get public approval, which comes from the police operating under the set rules and procedures, legitimacy is acquired. Traditional Legitimacy This is derived from the historical customs and procedures that govern an existing institution. The role of law enforcement officers in England and Wales evolved over a long period of time (Mc Conville and Bridges, 1994). In ancient England, the police were known as watchmen and their functions was mainly to maintain order in the society by ensuring people lived in harmony with each other (Roberts and Stalans, 1987). Over time, statutes and laws were enacted to form the police system in England. Charismatic Legitimacy This emanates from the charisma and personal ideas of a person whose ideas gain acceptance to a large percentage of people. The ideas of a charismatic person must be acceptable before the law and principles of governance in the community (Ward and Wragg, 2011). The roles of the police are defined by law, and this defines charismatic legitimacy in the sense that legal principles must support the character. The British government enjoys governmental legitimacy (Reichel, 2008). The government as constituted is administered by various laws with the monarch as its head. Its system of governance is democratic as it enjoys a universal suffrage that is necessary for a democracy. Through various laws and statutes, the government of Britain is accountable to its people. It also follows the principles of constitutionalism in enacting policies that affect the English people. Constitutionalism recognizes supreme, and anything done, must be in accordance to the law. Legitimacy of constitutionalism arises from the fact that actions of the government are legitimate because they abide by the law. In governance, by dividing the various organs of state, legitimacy is enhanced since these other organs will operate under the law. The role of police in maintaining law and order therefore has helped in defining these concepts of legitimacy, because these police function is governed by laws and statutes Bibliography Alderson, J. C.. Policing freedom: a commentary on the dilemmas of policing in western democracies. Estover [Eng.: Macdonald and Evans, 1979. Print. Bailey, Victor. Policing and punishment in nineteenth century Britain. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1981. Print. Bentley, D. J. (1998). English criminal justice in the nineteenth century. London: Hambledon Press. Blumenberg, H. (1983). The legitimacy of the modern age. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Clark, I. (2005). Legitimacy in international society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cownie, F., Bradney, A., & Burton, M. (2007). English legal system in context (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Elliott, C., & Quinn, F. (2008). English legal system (9th ed.). Harlow, Essex, England: Pearson Longman. Fennell, P. (1995). Criminal justice in Europe: a comparative study. Oxford: Clarendon Press ;. Fitzgerald, M., & Muncie, J. (1983). System of justice: an introduction to the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Oxford, England: B. Blackwell. Hay, Douglas, and Francis G. Snyder. Policing and prosecution in Britain, 1750-1850. Oxford [England: Clarendon Press ;, 1989. Print. Hess, K. M., & Wrobleski, H. M. (2006). Police operations: theory and practice (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Hirschel, D., & Wakefield, W. (1995). Criminal Justice in England and the United States. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. Hirschel, J. D., & Wakefield, W. (1995). Criminal justice in England and the United States. Westport, Conn.: Praeger. Huls, N. J., Adams, M., & Bomhoff, J. (2009). The legitimacy of highest courts' rulings: judicia deliberations and beyond. The Hague, The Netherlands: T.M.C. Asser Press ;. Langan, P. A., & Farrington, D. P. (1998). Crime and justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Lasser, M. d. (2004). Judicial deliberations: a comparative analysis of judicial transparency and legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McConville, M., & Bridges, L. (1994). Criminal justice in crisis. Aldershot, Hants, England: E. Elgar. Miyazawa, K., & Miyazawa, S. (1995). Crime prevention in the urban community. Deventer: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers. Reichel, P. L. (2008). Comparative criminal justice systems: a topical approach (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall. Roberts, J. V., & Stalans, L. J. (1997). Public opinion, crime, and criminal justice. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press. Rohr, J. A. (1986). To run a constitution: the legitimacy of the administrative state. Lawrence, Kan.: University Press of Kansas. Shapland, J., & Willmore, J. (1985). Victims in the criminal justice system. Aldershot: Gower. Waddington, P. A. J.. Liberty and order: public order policing in a capital city. London: UCL Press, 1994. Print. Top of Form Bottom of Form Ward, R., & Wragg, A. (2011). Walker & Walker's English legal system (11th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wilson, S. R. (2011). English legal system (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Top of Form Bottom of Form Read More