Tell me what has become of my life/ I have a wife and two children who love me/ I am the victim of police brutality, now/I’m tired of bein’ the victim of hate/You’re rapin’ me of my pride Oh, for God’s sake/I look to heaven to fulfill its prophecy/Set me free.[1][2]
Oh yes.
The first time the author came across the phrase ‘Police Brutality’ was from the 1996 release of Michael Jackson titled ‘They don’t care about us’, inspired by the Rodney King trial (and also from Michael’s own personal experience). While grooving to the beat, the weight of the words often passes over you. Rolling Stones’ designation of the sixth greatest album of all time2 goes to Marvin Gaye’s ‘What’s Going on’, a daring venture by Gaye that inspired a volley of revolutionary black music. It simply says ‘Don’t punish me with brutality’.
The Fine Art of Policing
The police were established to fill the social control vacuum created by industrial development which ‘separated class from class and eroded away older, more personal mechanisms of social control.[3] Police surveillance signified a deep penetration of the political authority of the state into daily life.[4] An ethos of “stay-low-and-avoid-trouble-unless-real-police-work-is-called-for” permeates police organizations.[5] Only tasks involving criminal apprehension are attributed to symbolic importance.[6] In the case of patrol works, for instance, charged with enforcing ambiguous generalized statutes and operating from an autonomous, largely isolated position within the city, it is not surprising that police have internalized a standard of conduct which dictates that they must control and regulates all situations in which they find themselves in.[7][A]ny misuse of public authority threatens the equilibrium of a system resting so fundamentally on the consent of the governed.[8] When power is exercised arbitrarily by the state, a person is made to act not in accordance with a legitimate, general rule but at the pleasure of state officials.[9] Frequent arbitrariness in the political domain leads to tyranny, quite like when persistently present in the social sphere, it leads to slavery.[10]Assuming, at least conceptually, that some police use of force is necessary and justified, there appear to be two other kinds of forces based on the mensrea of the police – extralegal and unnecessary.[11] Extralegal violence involves the willful and wrongful use of force by officers who knowingly exceed the bounds of their office.[12] Unnecessary/non-instrument brutality would be used to refer to brutality which occurs in everyday police work with no apparent need and without a clear purpose.[13]
‘For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Chuck him out, the brute!’
Police brutality “serves as a lightning rod for widespread public fear and anger” and may lead to “deep societal chasms.”14 One explanation for police brutality arises from how police work in itself is brutal and dehumanizing, coupled with frustration, phobia and tension, and uncertainty about the outcome of an action or a conflict.[14] Survivors of police brutality and families of victims who are killed accumulate scars that may last well past the swiftly shifting sands of the relentless 24-hour news cycle.[15] Police commissions have come and gone. Their ponderous recommendations have not brought about radical changes to the way we are policed. “[E]xcessive force is used quite often on the most disenfranchised members of society precisely because of their position in the social order.[16] While the US reeled under riots that took place consequent to the death of a man from the black community[17], elsewhere in the Indian Ocean, “In a brazen display of brute force, Police attack[ed] a peaceful protest in support of #BlackLivesMatter.[18] Earlier in the month, the president of the democracy had issued an Extraordinary Gazette notification[19] announcing the Presidential Directive for the establishment of a Presidential Task Force to build a Secure Country, [a] ‘Disciplined, Virtuous and Lawful’ Society.[20]
Tell me what has become of my rights?
The fundamental structure of the social world of the police can be narrowed down to six normative orders – law, bureaucratic control, adventure/machismo, safety, competence, and morality.22 Law is often viewed not as a determinant of police behavior, but as a resource for them to achieve some larger purpose, often described as “peacekeeping”[21]or “order maintenance”[22]. The use of administrative policy is the primary instrument in “which law enforcement agencies attempt to control officer discretion”.[23] There is inherently widespread mistrust of police officers. “[O]fficers who fatally shoot a suspect or even an unarmed civilian are overwhelmingly cleared of wrongdoing following a standard internal investigation of the incident.”[24] Because the reasonableness of an officer’s actions depends upon the unique facts and circumstances of each case, it is difficult to draw “bright line” rules that separate legally reasonable force from illegally excessive force.[25] Minority communities know that the so-called “Blue Wall of Silence”, and the fear of retaliation by colleagues, keeps officers from “ratting out” fellow officers or coming forward with incriminating evidence that might support a victim’s account of brutality.[26] Further, the doctrine of qualified immunity prevents government agents from being held personally liable for constitutional violations unless the violation was of “clearly established law.”[27]
Right the wrong – fin.
As I write this, Amnesty India called on the Tamil Nadu government in India, to “end impunity for police officers” with regards to the alleged custodial death of P Jayaraj and his son J Bennix who were imprisoned by police in Thoothukudi district. Excessive use of force by the police ought to be criminalized. Police tyranny, funding, accountability, and recruitment procedures need a thorough relook. Police Review boards must be empowered to identify administrative, supervisory, training, tactical, or policy issues within the law enforcement agency that lead to misconduct and to demand the correction of those issues.[28]To avoid high handedness there should be proper indoctrination of policemen at the grassroots. There have been increasing calls to dismantle the police in many jurisdictions. Examples from Iraq and Guatemala indicate that de-Ba’athification and rebranding respectively were executed in an unplanned fashion and rendered the efforts futile.[29] A key takeaway would be that meaningful reform requires a clear sense of direction rather than simply a re-packaging of the existing model.[30]We do not want more Garret Rolfes, Stacey Koons, Myles Cosgroves, or Derek Chauvins[31] in the making. To quote Bryan Stevenson, ‘An absence of compassion can corrupt the decency of a community, a state, a nation. Fear and anger can make us vindictive and abusive, unjust, and unfair until we all suffer from the absence of mercy and we condemn ourselves as much as we victimize others.”32
________
Journal of Legal Methodology, Policy and Governance 