How Can Democratic Policing Principles Be Utilized in Counter Terrorism?

One of the goals of terrorist organizations is to create conflict within society and between society and the government. They seek to provoke the public into insurgency against the legitimate governmental authority or to provoke the government against the civilians. The fear and panic created by terrorist attacks are sought to force governments to take harsh measures against the terrorists and put constraints on public life. The attempts of terrorist organizations to incite overreactions make governments appear repressive, which in turn, can be used by terrorist organizations for propaganda to undermine governmental authority.

Some decades ago, Fromkin (1975) pointed out such strategy of terrorism noting that terrorism achieves its goal not ,through its acts but through the response to its acts. He contends that “terror can accomplish nothing in terms of political goals; it can only aim at obtaining a response that will achieve those goals for it” (p. 689). Elaborating the French government’s policies in 1950s towards the Algerian National Liberation Front (NLF), Fromkin (1975) discusses how brutality – as an induced governmental response – can boomerang and eventually undermine governmental authority. Spain’s response to ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna or “Basque Homeland and Freedom”) or the Peruvian response to Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) also show how terrorist organizations benefited from indiscriminate and harsh governmental response (Baynard, 2005; Ron, 2001). Similarly, Durna and Hancerli (2007) identify traces of a comparable pattern in Turkey’s response to PKK (Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan - Kurdistan Workers Party) terrorism over the last two decades.

Preserving human rights and civil liberties and yet addressing terrorism has been a challenge in democratic countries. To some extent, it becomes inevitable to take security measures against terrorism that would constrain civil liberties. However, those security measures should take place in the rule of law and should avoid doing what the terrorists want.

Focusing on the effects of PKK terrorism in Turkey, this article discusses how principles of democratic policing can be utilized as part of a broader counter terrorism strategy. Although terrorist organizations have distinct motives (i.e., ethnic separatism, establishing religious or ideological order), the impacts of their acts among societies might be quite similar across countries. Moreover, responses to different terrorist threats by governments might share similar characteristics. I believe that incorporating principles of democratic policing into counter terrorism strategies will provide governments a valuable tool to address the conflict and tension created through long lasting struggles against terrorism.

Consequences of Fighting against Terrorism

As mentioned above, terrorist organizations seek to achieve their goals through responses to their actions. Severe measures and their indiscriminate implementation by the security forces hand over propaganda material to the terrorist organizations to undermine the authority of government. This is, for the most part, a consequence of identifying terrorism merely as a security problem and focusing on security measures while overlooking the social and economical aspects of the issue.

Effects of the PKK terrorism on the social fabric of the country can be traced through Turkey’s responses during the last two decades. The authors of Ankara Papers (2004) divide Turkish government policies for combating terrorism into three categories: proactive measures, reactive measures, and the democratization project. The proactive measures against terrorism include socio-economic policies, health and education programs, and governmental subsidies for agriculture and small businesses. Since the unemployed, undereducated, and hopeless youth has been the main target of the PKK’s recruitment campaigns, through economic investment to create jobs and a better life, the government aimed to win the support of the regional people and to undermine support for the terrorist organization. The democratization project includes all revisions and modifications in the legal system within Turkey’s efforts to enter the European Union.

The reactive policies, on the other hand, consist of the security measures developed during the struggle against the PKK terrorism. Law enforcement agencies (the police and the gendarmerie forces), military forces, temporary village guards, special anti-terrorist units, and declaration of state of emergency in eastern and southeastern Turkey were utilized to combat with the terrorist organization.

It should be noted that, in any democratic country where the public order is threatened by terrorism, enactment of legislation that place constraints on civil liberties might become necessary. Operations by security forces against PKK terrorists were carried out under special amendments to the Pre- vention of Terrorism Act. The US Patriot Act of 2001 and British government’s legal revisions after the 2005 London bombings can be regarded in this nature.

Although security measures taken by Turkey provided security forces the necessary grounds to develop effective combating strategies and contributed to Turkey’s success with curbing the PKK terrorism, they account for the majority of grievances from the public. Measures like the declaration of a state of emergency in southeast provinces, and the relocation of people from remote and unsecure villages or hamlets to safer urban areas inevitably imposed constraints on the daily lives of people. Migration from insecure villages and hamlets to urban areas resulted in a significant increase in the unemployment rate, poverty, organized crime, and street crimes over the years.

The PKK took advantage of the public frustration created by those security measures and exploited public sensitivity by claiming that Kurdish citizens were ignored and their rights and freedoms were deprived by the Turkish government. Together with the PKK’s propaganda, public grievances and complaints resulted in a lack of trust of governmental institutions and a tension between the law enforcement agencies and the public.

The success of the Turkish security forces against the PKK terrorists has increased the demands that social and economic aspects of terrorism should also be addressed within a broader counter terrorism strategy. Recent Turkish governments have increased the amount of economic investments for the southeastern part of the country and passed legislation that allows broadcasting in Kurdish language and opening language courses to teach Kurdish. All those efforts aim to regain the support of the regional people and to undermine the influence of the PKK over the citizens. I believe that social and economic measures must be supplemented by a comprehensive implementation of democratic policing principles to restore the public trust in law enforcement agencies, which, in turn, will help the government increase its effectiveness in addressing regional problems.

Democratic Policing

In a free and democratic society, themain duties of the police are to maintain public order, to protect and respect individual rights and freedoms, to prevent and combat crime, and to provide assistance and services to the public (OSCE, 2006). The role of the police in society becomes more important when security is the central concern in daily life. If the trust between the public and the police is weakened, democracy, governmental authority, and the public order begin to erode. Therefore, restoring the trust between the public and the police not only improves the security and quality of life and effectiveness of the police, but also contributes to development and sustainability of democracy.

Although there are commonly agreed upon definitions of democracy, democratic policing has been defined in different ways and levels of complexity. Nevertheless, all those definitions focus on a shared set of values and norms: accountability, transparency, and service orientation. Skolnick (1999) notes openness and accountability as fundamentals of democratic policing. According to Bruce and Neild (2005), five areas of concern are important for a police organization to be considered as democratic: protecting democratic political life; governance, accountability and transparency; service delivery for safety, justice, and security; proper police conduct; and police as citizens. Similarly, Bayley (1995; 2001) identifies accountability, protection of human rights, transparency, and developing a service orientation as internationally agreed standards of democratic policing. He further elaborates these norms stating that democratic police forces must act in accordance with the following norms (Bayley, 2001, p. 13):

1. Police must give top priority to servicing needs of individual citizens and private groups.

2. Police must be accountable to the law rather than to the government.

3. Police must protect human rights, especially those that are required for the sort of unfettered political activity that is the hallmark of democracy.

4. Police should be transparent in their activities.

Democratic police forces are mainly controlled by the citizens not by the state and operate under a philosophy that police service is based on values and culture. The police are transparent in their activities and accountable to the law and the public, not to the regimes or governments. Democratic police organizations act proactively to address the concerns and needs of the people, not necessarily to those identified by the state. In this sense, they are committed to change, rather than to the status quo and engage in dialogue and partnership with the community.

Discussion

In most cases, democratic policing has been identified and discussed in the course of reforming policing systems through international assistance in transitional or post-authoritarian states which experienced recent regime changes or civil turmoil. However, in those cases police reform is not sought to bring about political democracy but is believed to contribute to the development of democracy. Moreover, a country’s regime being democratic does not necessarily mean that its police forces implement democratic policing principles; the character of the government and the character of the police may not neatly coincide (Bayley, 1995). In the case of Turkey, I discuss how the implementation of democratic policing principles can contribute to restoring public trust to the police and how it can contribute to anti terrorism strategies of the country.

Over the last two decades, Turkey’s struggle against PKK terrorism primarily depended on reactive measures since the problem was identified in terms of security while social and economic attributes have been considered as secondary concerns. The police remained under the control of the state and have been responsive to the state identified problems. Moreover, in southeastern cities where the PKK activities were most apparent, the priority was always responding to terrorism and maintaining public order, not crime prevention. In line with the country’s general counter terrorism strategy, more emphasis was placed on gathering intelligence and hunting down the terrorists than developing strategies to prevent terrorist recruitment. By doing so, the police committed itself to the status quo and alienated itself from the society. Consequently, the public started to perceive the police as adversaries and as an instrument to control the citizens. As well as these duty characteristics, the hierarchical and centralized organizational structure characterized the Turkish police as a non-democratic police organization.

There has been a shift in Turkey’s overall response to PKK terrorism in recent years. While military and police operations continued against the PKK, the need for ad- dressing the social, economic, and cultural attributes of terrorism has emerged. The PKK has been weakened in the region and has lost appeal among its supporters. Recent governments have increased the amount of investments to the region in an attempt to address socioeconomic problems, primarily unemployment. Governmental subsidies for small businesses and agricultural products, and direct financial and material aids to the poor aimed to regain trust of the regional people to the state. However, some of those strategies have been perceived as ineffective or have been heavily criticized by the opponent parties and the media as being investments to secure votes in the elections rather than providing sustainable solutions to regional problems.

Along with the shift to address the terrorism problem and in the relative absence of terrorism- related incidents, the Turkish police has improved its equipment, infrastructure, and recruitment and training procedures. Strict enforcement of “zero tolerance” to human rights violations within the organization created a complete consciousness and promoted a comprehensive understanding of the rule of law and respect for civil liberties. Moreover, several projects have been launched to increase cooperation between the public and the police. However, there is still a lack of a comprehensive and systematic approach in this regard. As a part of the new strategy against terrorism, putting the core principles of democratic policing into practice can help the police regain public trust and alleviate the tension between the public and security forces.

The major difference between non-democratic and democratic policing is that in the latter, police work is in response to citizen identified problems as opposed to those identified primarily by the state. Although security and ethnic separatism are still major concerns in some cities of southeastern Turkey, the real problems for the people arise from the rapid urban growth due to the migration from unsecure villages or hamlets, which lead to a substantial increase in street crimes, crimes against property, gang activities, and drug related organized crime. The public has been increasingly demanding those issues to be addressed. Coupled with unemployment and poverty, the increase in crime has negatively affected the quality of life while providing a valuable opportunity for the police to rebuild ties with the public.

Shifting from a control-oriented approach to a more service-oriented approach, the Turkish police can take advantage of this opportunity by focusing on citizen-generated or -identified problems. Such an approach requires community involvement as partners in the process of identifying, prioritizing, and solving problems including crime, fear of crime, and social and physical disorder. Considering the strength of tribal connections in the southeast, the Turkish police should identify key community leaders and initiate contact with them to encourage citizen participation in regular police-community meetings where local problems will be addressed. A widespread use of police-community meetings will contribute to the development of a sense of mutual responsibility for enhancing public safety and addressing local problems. Successful police intervention with problems identified by the community will reinforce the participation process and build up mutual trust while the public experiences that their demands are being considered and their needs are being serviced. As Bayley (2001) contends, delivering police services in accordance with the needs of the public will enhance the legitimacy and authority of the government by demonstrating that the authority and resources of the state are being used in the interests of the people. For the governments, supporting the police to proactively address problems of citizens is a more effective strategy to gain public support and increase legitimacy than simply delivering goods and food to the poor.

Increasing visible law enforcement and focusing on criminal investigations rather than depending merely on covert operations can also contribute to restore public trust of the police. With more visibility of the police on the street, especially in the form of foot patrols, the public will develop a sense of security and both the police and the people will benefit from the time and opportunity to develop partnerships. Therefore, the police can increase its transparency since the public will be more aware of the police operations targeting street crime. The police also can increase transparency by systematically informing the public about its operations and crime trends as well as allowing citizens to obtain information about conducts of individual police officers. Furthermore, successful programs and good conducts of police officers should be gratified and shared with the public so that the public could see that their expectations are met.

Hunting down the terrorists can only be a part of counter terrorism but it is neither sufficient nor effective to deter people joining terrorist organizations or supporting them. A comprehensive anti-terrorism strategy should also include developing measures to address social, economic, and cultural attributes of the problem in order to break down the terrorist recruitment cycle and the support for terrorism. Practicing democratic policing principles can serve as a part of such a comprehensive approach. Restoring public trust through carrying out those principles will eventually make governmental authority stronger by showing that state resources are being used to address community problems. Moreover, active participation of the public to address their needs and problems in close relationship with the police will increase citizen satisfaction wtih the police services, reduce public grievances, thwart terrorist recruitment, and increase public tolerance of counter terrorism measures.

*Turkish Police Major, Police Training Adviser, OSCE Mission to Serbia

References

Ankara Papers (2004). The Case of the PKK: History, Ideology, Methodology, and Structure (1978–99). 9 (1): 1-83.

Bayley, David H. (1995). “A Foreign Policy for Democratic Policing”. Policing and Society. 5(2): 79-94.

Bayley, David H. (2001). Democratizing the Police Abroad: What to Do and How to Do It? Washington D.C.: National Institute of Justice.

Baynard, Sally Ann (2006). “A Policy Brief Defining and Defeating Terrorism in a Democracy.” Istanbul Conference on Democracy & Global Security 2005 Proceedings. Ankara: Oncu Press.

Bruce, David and Rachel Neild (2005). The Police that We Want: A Handbook for Oversight of the Police in South Africa. Open Society Justice Initiative.

Durna, Tuncay, and Suleyman Hancerli (2007). “Implementing Democratic Policing in the PKK Terrorism Torn Areas of Turkey”. In Nikbay, Ozgur and Suleyman Hancerli (eds.) Understanding and Responding to Terrorism Phenomenon: A Multi Dimensional Perspective. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series, IOS Press: Netherlands.

Fromkin, David (1975) “The Strategy of Terrorism” Foreign Affairs. 53 (4): 683– 698.

OSCE (2006). Guidebook on Democratic Policing.

Ron, James (2001). “Ideology in Context: Explaining Sendero Luminoso’s Tactical Escalation”. Journal of Peace Research. 38 (5): 569- 592.

Skolnick, Jerome H. (1999) “On Democratic Policing.” Ideas in American Policing. Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation.