Police Ethics An Ethical Framework

Defining Police Ethics

Abstract

Owing to the power and authority that law enforcement officers wield, it could be argued that honesty and integrity are some of the most crucial attributes of a police officer. This is more so the case given that failure to embrace the basic tenets of ethical behavior could result in abuse of power and loss of public trust and confidence in law enforcement. Indeed, to a large extent, in the absence of ethical conduct on the part of its officers, the police force as a whole is likely to be ill-equipped to address the various challenges that bedevil the society today. It is for this reason that there is need to initiate a discussion revolving around what police ethics entail. Most specifically, in seeking to advance the ethical conduct agenda in the police force, we should ask ourselves; what exactly is police ethics? Although most police departments have clear cut standards, systems, and structures that seek to outline and enforce ethical conduct, not all scenarios in the operational context lend themselves to those standards. It is for this reason that there is need to take into consideration how various ethical theories could be applied to the diverse situations that law enforcement officers are likely to encounter in the course of executing their mandate.

Introduction

Various happenings in the recent past have ignited the debate about the issue of police ethics. This is more so the case in relation to the behavior and conduct of law enforcement officers. Documented cases of police misconduct have been inclusive of, but they are not limited to; evidence tampering, assault, false arrest, police brutality, etc. One of the more recent cases of police misconduct was the death of George Floyd. Subsequent investigations of this high profile event indicated that there were numerous Minneapolis Police Department policy violations by the officers involved in the said arrest. Yet another recent incident was a rape allegation against an NYPD officer. Incidents such as these warrant discussions revolving around the relevance of ethical behavior within the police force. This discussion concerns itself with police ethics. In so doing, it will not only come up with a comprehensive definition of police ethics, but also take into consideration how the various ethical theories that have been proposed in the past could be applied to the diverse situations that law enforcement officers encounter in the course of executing their mandate

Discussion

An Overview of Police Ethics

From the onset, it would be prudent to note that there is no assigned definition for the term ethics. What this means is that in the past, various meanings have been assigned to the said term. However, from a broad perspective, ethics could be conceptualized as the various moral concepts and/or propositions that shape or direct the conduct or behavior of a person. More specifically, Kaptein (2011) defines ethics as the various standards of conduct that guide human interactions and prescribe conduct in terms of various virtues, obligations, and responsibilities. This is the definition to ethics that will be embraced in this text. According to Westmarland and Conway (2020), the terms ‘police integrity’ and ‘police ethics’ have in the past been used synonymously. More specifically, the authors are categorical that in the realm of law enforcement, police ethics relate to the ethical guidelines as well as formal police practices that law enforcement officers operate within in the performance of their roles and in efforts to instill and maintain public trust. To a large extent, police officers have a great deal of power and authority. Thus, like all other persons who wield great power, police officers are expected to serve and behave in a manner that does not result in the abuse of the said power.

Ethical Issues

In the course of executing their roles and duties, police officers often grapple with a wide range of ethical issues. It is important to note that to a large extent, some of the ethical issues and dilemmas that police officers encounter on a daily basis only apply to law enforcement. It would also be prudent to note that in comparison to other developed nations, the U.S. has a rather poor record of police ethics (Schwartz, 2020). Some of the recent examples of police misconduct in the country are inclusive of the George Floyd death, Walter Scott death, Philando Castile shooting, as well as Rodley King Beating. There have also been documented cases of witness tampering and systemic corruption. Although the violations highlighted above could be assessed by focusing on the main actor, there would be need to also embrace a macro perspective of the said violations and instances of misconduct. In so doing, we could, for instance, assess what the violations indicate about a police department as a whole. For instance, in the case of George Floyd, was Derek Chauvin – the police officer accused of killing Floyd – a mere symptom of a larger problem at the Minneapolis Police Department? Is there a possibility that the Minneapolis department condoned police brutality and racial bias? Yet another question of relevance in this case is whether there were hiring process defects on the part of the police department – which resulted in the failure to detect Chauvin’s flaws before he was hired. This last query is of great relevance from a virtue ethics theoretical perspective, as has been highlighted elsewhere in this text.

Westmarland and Conway (2020 indicate that police officers possess significant authority as well as power. There exists a possibility for the said powers to be misused and/or abused. There are also plenty of opportunities for the abuse and/or misuse of the said powers and authority. Examples of misconduct on this front could be inclusive of, but they are not limited to; the use of excessive force, unjust or unfounded searches and seizures, freedom deprivation, planting of evidence, etc. The clearly prescribed powers as well as the other discretionary powers that law enforcement officers exercise could reinforce unethical conduct. As a matter of fact, there are those who have in the past argued that law enforcement officers possess too much power that have to a large extent been deployed disproportionately – i.e. against the downtrodden in society, and not necessarily against the rich and powerful (Slavinski and Spencer-Suarez, 2021).

Ethics from a Theoretical Viewpoint

In some scenarios, law enforcement officers are required to make decisions within milliseconds. Further, regardless of the time taken to make crucial decisions, there exists a possibility that the motivations and appropriateness of such decisions could be analyzed going forward – in some instances for many years to come. It is also clear that the resolution of the ethical issues highlighted above could in some instances be an uphill task. This is more so the case given that all scenarios that police officers encounter are not captured in a specific department’s conduct or operational procedures and policies. Although consultations with senior officers could come in handy in efforts to resolve ethical dilemmas, opportunities for the said consultations do not always exist due to the nature and conduct of police work. Thus, such dilemmas could be assessed using the various ethical frameworks proposed by various theorists in the past. It therefore follows that in seeking to further comprehend the nature and application of police ethics, there would be need to take into consideration the various ethical theories that have been floated in the past and their application in the realm of law enforcement. The broad ethical theories that will be highlighted in this particular case are inclusive of utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. Collectively, these are often referred to as normative ethical theories.

i. Utilitarianism

To begin with, when it comes to utilitarianism, Roets, Bostyn, Keersmaecker, Haesevoets, Assche and Hiel (2020) indicate that main concern on this front happens to be the outcomes of courses of action. Thus, in seeking to make a determination as to the morality of a course of action, this particular theory would ordinarily prescribe that a law enforcement officer considers the consequences. It therefore follows that in seeking to resolve an ethical dilemma, a law enforcement officer would, as per this theory, select the course of action that would benefit the highest number of persons. For instance, an armed off-duty police officer could come across a large number of protesters advocating for the legalization of marijuana in one of the states that is yet to legalize the drug. After making an observation that some of those protesting are indeed smoking marijuana, the police officers has two choices; effect an arrest or wait for backup so as to detain the offenders. From a utilitarian perspective, the best course of action would be to wait for backup as any attempt to effect an arrest could turn confrontational and result in multiple injuries – i.e. especially if the officer is forced to use his firearm to contain the aggressive group. It should, however, be noted that as Baumane-Vitolina, Cals, and Sumilo (2016) indicate, there are a number of concerns that could arise in the deployment of utilitarianism. This, according to the authors, is more so the case given that not all ethical dilemmas can be resolved via the deployment of this particular theory. For instance, utilitarianism does not factor in possible unintended (and perhaps worse) consequences of a particular course of action. For example, in the example highlighted above, failure to immediately intervene could result in widespread looting.

ii. Deontology

Next, we have the deontological theory. On this front, the focus happens to be on a prescribed set of rules so as to make a determination as to whether an action ought to be considered good or bad. More specifically, according to Misselbrook (2015), ethical actions are those that are aligned with a set of rules. The authors indicate that Immanuel Kant is widely considered to be the one who proposed this ethical perspective. In the context of police work, deontology could come in handy in efforts to resolve diverse ethical dilemmas. For instance, in as far as universality is concerned, Misselbrook (2015) points out that Kant makes an observation to the effect that the implications of the decisions made should be considered as if they applied to all persons. Thus, for example, if a police officer unknowingly pulls over a close relative for speeding, whether or not to give a ticket is a decision that should be considered on what the implications would be if all police officers were to embrace this course of action as a standard format of operation. This is what is referred to as the universality rule.

Next, there is also the fidelity to duty consideration. On this front, police officers are expected to ensure that regardless of implications, their duty to the public is fulfilled. This is more so the case given that they have sworn to perform the duties associated with law enforcement. Thus, with reference to the example given above, it would be the duty of the law enforcement officer to issue a ticket to his speeding relative.

There is also the concept of respect in which case Kant, as Misselbrook (2015) indicates, was categorical that persons must not be deemed as mere means to certain ends. This is to say that a course of action should not be designed to merely accomplish a certain end while disadvantaging another person. For instance, a law police officer should not promise an accused person that all charges against them would be dropped if they implicate an accomplice, when the said officer is aware that this would not be the case.

iii. Virtue Ethics

To a large extent, virtue ethics, according to Baumane-Vitolina, Cals, and Sumilo (2016) are largely inclined towards virtue and character as opposed to duty. In the general application context, the implication on this front is that good things are done by good people, and that doing good is a condition to be a good person. It therefore follows that as opposed to the ethical theories that have been highlighted above, the focus in this case is not the extent of harm caused versus the number of people helped, or the end result of a course of action. Instead, the focus happens to be on the character of an individual as the factor that ‘triggers’ the move to do the right thing. Indeed, as Baumane-Vitolina, Cals, and Sumilo (2016) observe, in the context of virtue ethics, there is little thought about the ideal course of action because a moral decision happens to be more of an automatic response. In the context of law enforcement, we should take into consideration what could be considered the ideal character exhibited by a law enforcement officer. On this front, we could be guided by the definition that Roszkowska and Mele (2021) assign to character. According to the authors, character could be conceptualized as an individual’s stable moral qualities (Roszkowska and Mele, 2021). Some of the stable moral qualities that we could assign to law enforcement officers could be sourced from the Six Pillars of character that are highlighted by the Center for American and International Law. These are inclusive of civic virtue and citizenship, caring, justice and fairness, responsibility, respect, and trustworthiness (Roszkowska and Mele, 2021). We could speculate that these are the characteristics that law enforcement officers ought to exhibit so as to be able to practice virtue in the execution of their mandate even in scenarios deemed challenging or difficult. It should also be noted that in seeking to apply this particular ethical theory to law enforcement work, the relevance of having in in place a robust and effective hiring framework cannot be overstated. This is to say that there is need to ensure that those hired as police officers are persons of impressive moral character.

Ethics as a Conformity Issue

Ethics could also be defined from the perspective of conformity. This is more so the case in relation to the willingness of a person to embrace certain ethical standards and/or principles. It should be noted that available research indicates that there are a wide range of factors that affect the willingness of a person to conform or adhere to certain standards of ethical behavior. These will be highlighted below. There would be need to discuss these issues so as to get deeper understanding of the motivation behind unethical behavior and misconduct on the part of law enforcement officers.

i. Conformity Bias

This, according to Germar, Albrecht, Voss, and Mojzisch (2016), relates to the tendency of persons to embrace or adopt the behavior of others. It is for this reason that as the authors further indicate, even when it comes to ethical decision making, people are likely to mimic those around them. We could tie this particular assertion to the behavior and conduct of police officers to the extent that if the police department condones unethical conduct, then most officers are likely to be influenced into adapting their good or ethical values so as to conform to the department’s standard of ‘misbehavior.’

ii. Personality

Personality has also been linked to likelihood to conform. This is to say that even in those scenarios or instances where there is significant pressure to conform, there are likely to be cases of nonconformity that could be attributed to personality differences. Dullas, Yncierto, Labiano, and Marcelo (2021) point out that various studies have indicated that individual behaviors as well as outcomes could be predicted, to a great extent, by personality traits. According to the authors, personality traits could be conceptualized as an individual’s behavior towards the environment, models of thought, as well as methods of perception (Dullas, Yncierto, Labiano, and Marcelo, 2021). Dullas, Yncierto, Labiano, and Marcelo (2021) further observe that personality traits play a huge role in how we respond to events or experiences deemed stressful. With this in mind, this happens to an issue of great relevance in as far as police recruitment is concerned. This is more so the case given that the ‘wrong’ personality traits could largely be predictors of unethical conduct on the part of individual candidates. Standard personality tests could, thus, be designed for the purpose of being deployed in recruitment efforts.