Implementing Community-based Policing in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia to Establish Relationships with Citizens

This essay proposes that in Turkey, the police can play a critical role establishing a partnership between the government and citizens due to the fact that police officers are the most visible representatives of the government. Community-based policing can be an effective strategy to establish partnership with citizens, increase the satisfaction of police practices, and build trust among citizens to facilitate democratic policing in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia, where terrorist groups have gained a foothold in spreading dissent. First, the geopolitical context and a brief history of community policing will be presented. Second, the potential benefits of implementing community- based policing will be discussed. Finally, a case study from the region will demonstrate the practicability of community-based policing in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia.

Geopolitical Context:

National and Regional Turkey is in the process of entering the European Union (EU), and democratic policing is one of the essential components of the EU membership. Democratic policing requires not only establishing a relationship and building trust with citizens but also increasing the legitimacy and accountability of police practices. The relations between the police and the communities have been improving day by day in Turkey; however it is not yet adequate. It has been especially tentative in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia because of the longstanding terrorism problem in the region. Those citizens who had a lack of trust in the government had also a lack of trust in the police because the police are the apparent face of the government. In addition, some citizens had negative opinions about police officers because of the treatment they received from some police officers, (who we believe represent a very small number of the police force). In the past, accusations of mistreatment while in police custody were made by some citizens.

One of the biggest events happened from March 28 to March 31, 2006 between security forces and citizens. In response to the death of 24 terrorists by security forces on March 24, the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), a terrorist organization used propaganda to incite the citizens to protest the government with a demonstration. They claimed that security forces had used chemical weapons to kill 14 militants in Diyarbakir. Riots broke out as a result of the continuous propaganda against security forces and governments; of the 2500-3000 people who actively participated in the violence, 80% were children. The rioters attacked police stations and other government buildings with stones and Molotov cocktails. Most of them clashed with the police. A total of 9 rioters were killed and 360 were injured, as well as 199 members of the security forces as a result of the security force intervention. Human right groups, supported by terrorist groups, claimed that the police used excessive force during the riots. During the four days all stores in the city were closed. And, some police officers were not able to go to their homes where their own families were waiting with great fear. Despite meetings between the deputy governor, the police chief, politics leaders, and community leaders, the riots could not be prevented. The riots ended on April 1st, but the memories of the events remained in the region. After the riots, the police were alleged to have used unnecessary force, resulting in the deaths of the protestors during the riots.

Brief Overview of Community-based Policing

Community-based policing is emerging as an advanced form of professional policing, particularly in developed countries, and its popularity has been increasing gradually around the world. Advocates of community-based policing intended to reform the police in order to make the police more accountable to the public and eliminate the historically poor relationship between police and citizens, especially with minority communities (Eck & Rosenbaum, 1994; Lurigio & Rosenbaum, 1994).

Trojanowicz (1998), considered the father of community policing, defines the primary object of community-based policing as the improvement of relations between community citizens and the police. According to Trajanowicz, community policing seeks to resolve community security problems by establishing partnerships between the police and the community members. In addition to establishing partnerships, organizational change and problem-solving models are other important elements of community policing. Community-based policing can be classified as democracy in action which requires active participation of community leaders, public and private agencies, local government, and civic and business leaders (Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1994).

Community-based policing promises significant benefits to the public and the police. Most studies have found that community policing has had a modest effect on crime, but a considerable effect on increasing quality of life, reducing the fear of crime, and increasing the quality of interaction between police and the public (Eck & Rosenbaum, 1994; Skolnick & Bayley, 1987).

The Benefits of Implementing Community- based Policing to Establish Democratic Policing in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia

Past experience has shown that there is a direct benefit of establishing a partnership between the police and public through community-based policing activities (Innes, 2006; Moraale, 2003). Police departments in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia could benefit from this partnership in several ways.

1. Establishing a Positive Relationship with the Public

Advocates of community policing suggest that community-based policing programs promise to close the gap between the police and community (Greene, 2000; Skolnick & Bayley, 1987). Research has shown that various community-based policing programs such as foot patrols, community meetings, and door-to-door visits increase the level of interaction between the police and community, as well as the satisfaction with police services among citizens (Eck & Spelman, 1987). Community policing emphasizes that police officers should communicate with people, encourage citizens to voice their concerns, and become a visible part of the community. By being visible and available to the public, the police officers can be easily reached by the community to respond to their needs and emergent problems (Eck & Spelman, 1987; Lurigio & Rosenbaum, 1994).

As Goldstein (1987) explained, when a strong partnership is established, communities can get to know the police officers, which can lead to the elimination of negative views of police in the neighborhoods where the tension between police and citizens is high. In many cases, fighting terrorism in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia has required the application of proactive policing techniques and methods such as searching persons, houses, and cars by security forces, which has been deleterious to community feeling. A great deal of research has found that proactive approaches carry potential risks, one of which is increased negative societal attitudes toward the police (Roberg, Crank, & Kuykendall, 2000). Therefore, establishing partnerships with citizens through community-based policing activities can play a key role to improve the tensions. In addition, establishing a strong communication network between communities and the police will eliminate possible rumors or other false information regarding police operations (Innes, 2006).

2. Building Trust with Citizens

Community-based policing can help establish trust between the police and the community members. Despite the fact that citizens generally distrust police institutions as a whole, they may place their trust in individual members of the institutions. Police officers can build personal relationships with citizens in the region through activities which in turn can create trust between police and communities. However, building trust is not an easy task in Eastern Anatolia and requires constant effort. For example, the use of unnecessary force, arrogance, or rudeness by police officers can diminish the trust of community members of the police. The police could build trust in Eastern Anatolia by demonstrating sensitive and respectful approaches to different concerns of the communities. At the same time, building trust in some neighborhoods would require the involvement of basic social institutions, such as municipalities, families, mosques, and schools.

3. Increasing the Legitimacy of Police Practices

Community-based policing can help police agencies to increase their legitimacy among the public in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia. In a democratic policing environment, policing must be based on consent across the community to be effective and the police must be viewed as legitimate in order to get cooperation from the public (Eck & Rosenbaum, 1994). Gaining legitimacy is one of the crucial objectives of communitybased policing because citizens not only evaluate police officers according to their effectiveness on crime prevention, but they also evaluate them on how sensitive they are about respecting their constitutional rights and how responsively they meet their needs (Moore, 1992). As Ross and Sabir (2004) point out, studies have shown that citizens are more cooperative when police treat them fairly and respect their values, beliefs, and cultures. Community-based policing promises that police departments become kinder and gentler to citizens, more sensitive to the protection of the constitutional rights of citizens, and more fair-minded on the job. (Greene, 2000; Skogan, 1994).

4. Increasing the Accountability of Police Practices

Stone and Ward (2000) state that accountability is one of the essentials of democratic policing; a democratic force is accountable to multiple audiences, such as citizens, private groups, or the media through multiple mechanisms. Police should be accountable for Turkish police builds future connections with children. how they try to protect society, how they respond to crime, and how they achieve public safety (Stone & Ward, 2000). Police officers should remember at all times that their duty is to protect and help members of the public no less than to apprehend criminals and terrorists. Within this democratic policing context, community policing can function as an accountability mechanism when it provides opportunities for citizens to put forth their own concerns and priorities, and to hold police accountable for addressing them (Goldstein, 1990; Moore, 1992). As Moore (1992) maintains, police departments should become more responsive and accountable to the concerns and demands of citizens under community policing. For example, in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia, as community-based policing requires, police departments can establish liaison officers and councils with different ethnic groups who have troubled relationships with the police in the region. These liaison officers can connect with those communities and develop programs to meet their special needs. Police departments should also create special programs to increase the knowledge and sensitivity of other police officers who are dealing with ethnic groups (Skolnick & Bayley, 1987).

At the same time, community-based policing promises transparency in police services which is an explanatory and cooperative sense of policing (Stone & Ward, 2000). By conducting community meetings, carrying out door-to-door visits, and delivering informational booklets, police departments keep the public knowledgeable about what the police are doing and why they are doing it. This is important when police departments in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia want to gain public confidence and active cooperation.

5. Gaining Information and Intelligence

It is safe to argue that police departments should gain intelligence and information in order to prevent any terrorist activities, as well as other criminal activities. Intelligence is essential for police to understand the features of terrorist organizations, their future plans, and their methods of recruiting members into the organization. Police can gain critical intelligence when citizens become the eyes and ears of the police.As Goldstein (1987) and later, Moraale (2003) insist, communities are invaluable intelligence sources for police because citizens are in more advantageous positions relative to the police in spotting suspicious persons and conditions in their neighborhoods. Local police officers come into contact with large number of individuals on a daily basis in their duties. When community members in Eastern Anatolia trust the police, are satisfied with police practices, and see them as legitimate, they can provide important intelligence regarding terrorist activities to police officers. In fact, some examples from the region reinforce this idea: a counter-terror unit officer reported that a wanted terrorism sympathizer was turned in to the police by his father because of the trust the father had in the police.

Case Study

In September 2005, police captain O. E. was assigned to the central police station in Diyarbakir, which is the largest city in the southeastern part of Eastern Anatolia. When he started his duty, he became aware of several external and internal problems. Externally, citizens did not have positive opinions about the police. At the same time, police officers had similar feelings on the citizens. Due to the lack of trust between the two parties, there was only a weak relationship between them, and the police station received little information about criminal activities in the district.

Internally, he realized that police officers were assigned foot-patrol duty on five different beats in the district, and so did not have time to really get to know any one specific neighborhood community. After a certain time, he also became aware of the fact that these officers were patrolling without doing anything toward accomplishing the goals of the station. Mostly, they would spend their time sitting and waiting for the end of the work shift to go their homes rather than showing a desire to protect and help the public. They hardly came in contact with citizens nor asked about their concerns.

O.E. had a belief that without citizen support, the police could not be effective in crime prevention He also believed that antiterrorism units could be helped by gaining the trust of citizens and informing them of the traps of terrorist organizations. Some terrorist organizations were actively trying to gain ground and recruit individuals from his district. To counteract what he observed, he wanted to implement community-based policing in his region. His main goal was to gain the trust of the citizens and to find permanent solutions to their problems by working together in close relationships. In order to reveal this new strategy, he made some changes to the structure of the station. He instructed patrol officers to make at least four to five door-to-door visits to citizens, especially to retail and store owners. He also instructed his officers to ask citizens about their concerns and problems and report their opinions on current police practices in the region. These officers advised citizens to call 155 (Police Emergency), as well as the station phone number and their private numbers to report any of their concerns or any criminal activity they were aware of. To set an example, he organized community meetings involving a large number of people from the neighborhood with patrol officers and demonstrated his new policing strategy in the district. He established close relationships with community leaders, business leaders, tradesmen, and teachers in the region and arranged meetings to create permanent solutions to problems of the community. He implemented the system of neighborhood policing in his jurisdiction in January, 2006.

In January 2007, patrol officers visited 365 retail owners and citizens: 93% of them gave favorable opinions, whereas only 7% expressed negative opinions regarding new police activities in the district. In February 2007, patrols officers visited 414 retail owners. 88% of them had positive opinions on police, 11% did not give any opinion, and only 1% gave negative opinions about the new strategy. The Central Police Station previously received few calls from the citizens in their district. However, the number of the calls police received from citizens significantly increased as a result of his neighborhood policing strategies. For example, while the police station had received an average of only one or two calls each year from 2000-2005 from citizens regarding criminal activity in the region, in 2006, when community policing was implemented, the police station received 41 phone calls from citizens regarding various kinds of illegal activity in the region.

In fact, the central police station solved two serious burglaries through the assistance of citizens, who helped and trusted the police. In addition, as a result of their trust and reciprocity, Captain O.E. was able to prevent a demonstration which could have had negative consequences in the city. He was informed by two retailers, with whom he had established a good relationship, that retail owners and tradesmen would demonstrate against the police and government because of the increase in burglaries. A short time later, he was also informed by these people that certain terrorist groups were supporting the demonstration and planning to create further violence in the city. He immediately took action and called 50-60 retail and store owners for a meeting at the station. He explained to them the steps he had taken to solve the crimes and guaranteed that he would take all appropriate and necessary actions to prevent burglaries in the district. He showed them the statistics that revealed the number of criminals caught by the police, but released by the court. Therefore, these people left the station with a more positive view of the police. They talked to other store owners and decided to cancel the demonstration. As a result of these community-based policing initiatives, a good communication system and relationship between police officers and citizens in the Central Police Station jurisdiction was established.

Conclusion

A police service which is not constantly and consistently engaged with the community will find it challenging to gain the trust of citizens and gain information from them. Plainly, community-based policing programs may bring significant benefits for the police departments, especially in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia. They can be used to improve relations between police and the public, build trust in the public, gain legitimacy, and, show accountability of police practices. When police officers establish a partnership with community members and gain their trust, they will be able to gain their support regarding criminal activities, as well as terrorist activities in the region.

Given all of the benefits of communitybased policing, the police departments would do well to establish or improve their community policing activities in the region in order to create a good relationship with citizens. Police departments need not give up implementing traditional policing strategies to prevent terrorism activities and apprehend terrorists. Rather, it seems clear that by establishing a strong partnership and trust with citizens, the police increase benefits to counter terrorism.

* Turkish Police Major and Ed. D. Student at Spalding University, Department of Education

References

Bureau of Justice Assistance. (1994). Understanding community policing: A frame for action. Retrieved April 26, 2007, form http://www.ncjrs. gov/pdffiles/commp.pdf

Eck, J. E. & Spelman, W. (1987). Problem solving: Problem oriented policing in Newport News. Washington, D.C: Police Executive Research Forum.

Eck, J. E. & Rosenbaum, D. P. (1994). The new police order: effectiveness, equity, and efficiency in community policing. In D. P. Rosenbaum (Eds), The challenge of community policing: Testing the promise (pp. 3-23). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Goldstein, H. (1987). Toward community-oriented policing: Potential, basic requirements, and threshold questions. Crime & Delinquency, 33, 6-30.

Goldstein, H. (1990). Problem solving policing. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Greene, R. J. (2000). Community policing in America: Changing the nature, structure, and functions of the police. Criminal Justice, 3, 299- 369.

Innes, M. (2006). Policing uncertainty: Countering terror through community intelligence and democratic policing. ANNALS, AAPSS, 605, 222-241.

Lurigio, A., J. & Rosenbaum, D., P. (1994). An inside look at community policing reform: Definitions, organizational changes, and evaluation findings. Crime & Delinquency, 40, 299-314.

Moore, H. M. (1992). Problem solving and community policing. Crime and Justice, 15, 99-159.

Morreale, S. A. (2003) Using the community policing model for approaching terrorist threats and domestic preparedness. Retrieved April 23, 2007, from http://www.necp2.org/pubs/CPTerrorism_ HomSecurity.pdf

Roberg, R., Crank, J., & Kuykendal, J. (2000). Police and society. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury Publishing Company.

Ross, W. & Sabir, W., S. (2004). Community policing: A law enforcement initiative for a safer society or a tool for racial profiling. International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity, 8, 45-59.

Skogan, W., G. (1994). The impact of community policing on neighborhood residents. In D. P. Rosenbaum (Ed.), The challenge of community policing: Testing the promises (pp.167-182). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Skolnick, J. H. & Bayley, D., H. (1987). Themes and variation in community policing. Crime & Justice, 10, 1-37.

Stone, C., E. & Ward, H., H. (2000). Democratic policing: A framework for action. Policing and Society, 10, 11-45.

Trojanowicz, R. (1998). Community policing: A contemporary perspective (2nd ed), Ohio: Anderson Publishing Company.