The police want powers. They want the power to choose whether a person is charged and what the charges should be. They want the authority to get access to your internet usage on demand without first getting a warrant. They want to use the photos in ICBC’s database to try and match up names to faces from the Vancouver riot without first obtaining a warrant. They want the power to issue you a lengthy Immediate Roadside Prohibition that starts long before you get a hearing.
We previously discussed the issue of police bungling. Simply put, the police make plenty of mistakes, often terrible mistakes and they can have dire consequences. Importantly, many of their mistakes only come out through the court process when the issue is identified in a trial. This is why we have judicial oversight.
It seems to us that the police in this country have moved beyond the traditional role of policing and they are attempting to usurp the role of the judiciary and prosecutors. Collapsing the functions of the judiciary and handing them to the police are what one expects to see in a police state. Thankfully we are not there yet, but you may feel that we have already arrived if you received an IRP.
The police always seem to be the first to advocate for a police state. What protects us from living in a police state is enlightened democratic government (which is missing at the moment), the courts and our constitution which includes the Charter of Rights.
The police also have something analogous to a constitution; a set of guidelines almost 200 years old known as Peelian Principles.
You can find them on the University of Washington website. In our view they are an excellent set of guidelines that apply as well today as they did in 19th-century England. One that police forces in BC apparently no longer abide by is:
- Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
Most observers would agree that there is a crisis of confidence in policing in British Columbia. We believe that part of the problem is that the police have taken on the role of lobbyists to advocate for powers that usurp the function of the judiciary.
A recent study found that almost half of 10,000 Canadian police officers surveyed are dissatisfied with the ethical leadership of the senior managers within their forces.
The police have become advocates for certain policy decisions. They are now a lobby group. Which is not the purpose of a police force. And they are lobbying to do away with one of the most important historic tenets of policing.
This may contribute to the dissatisfaction officers have with their management and ultimately public confidence in the police.