Policing after Peace

ECPR 2015: Workshop 11 Pragmatic Approaches to Peace Building

Guy Ben-Porat, Ben-Gurion University

gbp@som.bgu.ac.il

John Paul Lederach has reminded scholars and experts of the limits of peace agreements, a

starting rather than an end-point. "[W]e tend to attach to 'agreement' the idea that negotiations are

over when in fact they are just beginning, and to continue they require a shift from a temporary

effort to negotiate an agreement to a context-based, permanent, and dynamic platform capable of

regenerating solutions to ongoing episodes of conflict" (in Borer, 2006, p. 4). Violence and

insecurity are major problems in post-conflict states that have yet to gain the ability to provide

security and maintain the rule of law. Before and during the conflict police was often politically

biased, ethnically divided, disrespectful of human rights, inefficient in ensuring security for all

citizens (Celador, 2005) and, consequently, “regarded as emblematic of the problems and abuses

that have torn societies apart” (Peake, 2004:5). Policing is an essential function of the state that

has a direct and immediate bearing on citizens’ everyday life and, therefore, is a cornerstone of

post-conflict reconstruction. Implementing peace depends, among other things, on the ability to

establish an effective and legitimate police, required to prevent a relapse of violence and provide

the stability required for social and economic reconstruction.

Police reforms in countries that emerge from violent conflicts face the challenges of a

culture of violence that still exists, arms that are present and a security apparatus that has yet to

gain credibility and legitimacy (Darby and MacGinty, 2000, pp. 12-13). To implement peace, new

or renewed police forces must be set up, replacing their predecessors, identified with the “old

order” and lacking sufficient legitimacy. The need to establish an effective and legitimate police

force has led to different projects where domestic and international actors have sought to create,

reconstruct or reform public security (Grillot, 2008; Marenin, 2005). In this preliminary and

conceptual paper, part of a planned and based on an on-going research, I attempt to present a

political science based framework to explain the concepts and dilemmas of building effective and

legitimate police force.

Police and policing are a relatively neglected topic in main political science literature. This

is somewhat surprising considering the significant role police plays in everyday life and its impact

on various social and political arenas. Police forces exemplify in the role they perform a basic

definition of the state, the monopoly over the legitimate use of force. This complex role alludes to

problems of legitimacy, trust and effectiveness and solutions based on representativeness,

procedural justice and participation. Within a setting of post-conflict, and very commonly

multicultural, political entities, questions of police and policing are pertinent.

In modern societies, globalized and characterized by rapid social changes, and diversified

by immigration and the strengthening of ethnic identities, maintaining the rule of law is a major

challenge. Clashes between police and minorities, reports of discrimination and racial practices

and high levels of crime in minority neighborhoods are all indications of the need for police

reforms that would enhance citizen’s trust in police. A fair and effective police can create a safer

environment for all groups and contribute to the creation of the “bonds of citizenship” required

for a legitimate state (Bayley, 2002). Conversely, a police that suffers from a lack of legitimacy,

or trusted only by some groups but not by others, may fail to provide adequate services, further

lose its legitimacy and, consequently, its ability to provide safety. Breaking this vicious cycle is a

challenge for many established democracies that initiated various police reforms. Similarly, post-

conflict states need to initiate reforms to establish a legitimate and effective police force, a break

from the past where police was part of the conflict, politically biased, ethnically divided,

disrespectful of human rights and inefficient in ensuring security for all citizens (Celador, 2005).

Police reforms attempt to turn police, previously a “part of the problem”, into a part of the

solution, integrated and mainstreamed into political dialogue and cooperation.

Establishing a legitimate and effective police force in post-conflict states is essential for and

connected with governance, economic growth and for the future of the peace process itself. The

study of police legitimacy and reforms, therefore, engages with particular questions of

representation, fair procedures, public oversight and participation as they pertain to police reforms.

Yet, it also engages with wider and important questions of democracy, legitimacy and citizenship

pertinent to many states where inclusion of minorities remains a challenge. In this paper, I address

different aspects of police reform relevant to the re-building of police as part of a pragmatic

approach that takes into account local, on-ground, contexts but also attempt to foster change. The

period following the agreement is a sensitive period in which the security apparatus has yet to gain

credibility and legitimacy among all groups. Distrust of police may inhibit its ability to control

crime, reduce police effectiveness and, consequently, again, increase distrust of the police. Post-

conflict periods harbor risks but also potential for re-building a new police force accepted by all

parties. While a legitimate police force, trusted by all parties to the conflict and able to serve and

protect, is essential, identifying the problems and potential solutions must take into account specific

needs and requirements of different communities.

In the first part of the paper I will describe the problem of policing within the context of

multi-ethnic and multi-cultural societies where trust in police varies between groups and different

perceptions and expectations of policing. Indeed, only policing that respects the rights of all citizens

and is responsive to their needs can be effective in preventing crime and maintaining order (Nield,

2006). The second part of the paper will engage with questions of trust, legitimacy and effectiveness

in relation to policing. I offer two measureable concepts, under-policing and over-policing, to

explain different perceptions of ethnic groups towards police. The third part of the paper will

explore reform measures discussed in political science concepts: representation, procedural justice

and participation.

Peace, Security and Police

The pervasive insecurity of societies torn by conflict are often carried to the post-conflict

stages where, on the one hand, social order is required to establish economic and political

development but, on the other hand, the institution in charge of providing security is yet to gain

trust that crosses the divides of society. Scholars and professionals in recent years have begun to

pay attention to questions of post-conflict processes and the need to sustain formal agreements that

end war with political, social and economic stability. Peace processes are a complex succession of

transformations punctuated by long periods of inertia, sticking points and setbacks and the euphoria

that often accompanies the early stages of settlement, with promises of material betterment, turns

to disillusionment when hopes, realistic or not evaporate (Miall et al, 1999, pp. 183-4). The end of

the armed conflict, therefore, does not mean the end of political conflict, as the transition to peace

takes place in a context of different social conflicts (Hoglund and Zartman, 2006). Keeping the

parties on the track of the peace process and dissuading them from returning to violence depends

on the ability to transform the relations – a long-term process that includes changes in attitude

toward the “enemy,” mutual confidence building and security.

Implementation of peace agreements can also be described as "peace building," defined by

the former UN Secretary Boutros-Ghali as "actions to identify and support structures which will

tend to strengthen and solidify peace in order to avoid a relapse into conflict" (quoted in Borer,

2006, p. 12). Alternatively, Miall, Rambston and Woodhouse (1999, p. 188) distinguish peace

building from humanitarian activities, defining it as a political initiative for "reducing the risk of

resumption of conflict and contributing to the creation of conditions most conducive to

reconciliation, reconstruction, and recovery." The implementation of peace agreements implies a

structural change that would, at the minimum, dissuade rivals from taking up arms again or, at best,

remove the option of violence from the policy-makers’ repertoire. The period following the

agreement raises two challenges described above: preventing a relapse into conflict and removing

the structural causes of the conflict. Reconstruction, that follows the cessation or a significant

reduction of violence, includes the creation of local capacities that include economic and political

functions that would ensure governance and stability.

Policing Multicultural Societies

Peace agreements that guarantee equality and recognition for all groups and individuals become a

reality when state institutions begin to respect all citizens and to accommodate for new needs and

demands. Lessons from democracies with diverse population demonstrate that police must develop

the capabilities to engage with different sectors, to overcome its own biases and prejudices in order

to serve all groups (Barlow and Barlow, 2000; Casey, 2000; Kelling and Moore, 2006). Clashes

between police and citizens, especially minority groups, recorded police violence and declining

trust of citizens in police across the world have caught the attention of the media and raised the

question how prepared is the police for contemporary challenges of policing multicultural societies.

Police reform must take into account that different groups may have different perceptions about

what good policing means, based upon different concerns, interests and experiences. For some

groups good policing is measured by “efficacy,” namely, police’ ability to “serve and protect,”

while for other groups it is about the fairness of the police, the way it treats citizens and its

commitment to equality. Consequently, police reform has to take into account not only the needs

of individual citizens but also of communities (or “target groups”) that have specific needs and

requirements.

The nature of police work and the type of engagement it entails require specific attention to

the way it is regarded by citizens (Brunson and Miller, 2006; Fleras, 1992; Howell, Perry and Vile,

2004). Distrust of police may inhibit its ability to control crime, reduce police effectiveness and,

consequently, again, increase distrust of the police (Brown and Benedict, 2002; Decker, 1985).

Perceptions of and interactions with police are mediated through personal and group experience

and differ between groups. Studies about public confidence and trust in the police find a gap

between levels of trust among minorities and the majority population (Wortley and Owusu-

Bempah, 1999). In the United States, African-American and Hispanic citizens believe they are

discriminated against by the police (Weitzer and Tuch, 2004: 17). Similarly, studies in Britain

(Bowling and Philips, 2003; Chakraborti and Garland, 2003; Jefferson and Walker, 1993;);

Germany (Albrecht, 1997); Canada (O’Conner, 2008; Wortley, 1996); Finland (Egharevba, 2006)

and Israel (Ben-Porat and Yuval, in process; Hasisi and Weitzer, 2007, 2008; Rattner, 2005; Smith

and Yechezkel, 2004) have established differences in perceptions about the police between the

majority population and minority, immigrant or ethnic groups. Negative perceptions of the police

are re-enforced by marginalization and discrimination against minorities, as well as by direct

mistreatment by the police (Mauer and King, 2007; Walker, Spone and DeLone, 2000; Weitzer and

Tuch, 1999).

Lessons from multicultural (explicitly or implicitly) democracies can be relevant for

implementing peace. Identified with the old order, trust in police is likely to differ between those

who saw it as a protector and those who perceived police oppressive and abusive. A police force

that can provide security for all political sectors, unlike the politicized and abusive predecessors,

must be under civilian control, provide a public service, and be ethnically plural and non-partisan

(Nield, 2005). As Nield (2005) argues, “only policing that respects the rights of all citizens and is

responsive to their needs can be effective in controlling crime and maintaining order.” Differently

stated, police relies not on traditional perceptions and patterns of policing that rest on compliance,

deterrence and zero-tolerance but on new ideas and methods that stress legitimacy and trust.

Legitimacy and Trust

Legitimacy is a contested concept that refers to legality or constitutionality, justification,

belief, and appropriateness that relate to citizens’ acceptance of political authority as much as it

follows from the authorities' ability to exert power over them. Achieving legitimacy can be also

treated as an interactive process between the institutions and citizens that includes the domains of

input, output, and throughput (Easton 1965; Scharpf 1999, 2007; Bekkers and Edwards 2007;

Schmidt 2012). The input refers to the ‘governing by the people’ and refers to the mechanisms of

recognition of citizens interests. The output refers to the ‘government for the people’ meaning that

‘the policies adopted will generally represent effective solutions to common problems of the

governed’ (Scharpf 2003) . Throughput refers to the ‘quality of the governance processes’, which

is influenced by the efficacy, accountability, transparency, inclusiveness and openness to interest

intermediation (Schmidt 2012).

Police require public support and cooperation; support and cooperation derive from the

perceived legitimacy of the police; perceived legitimacy stems in part from the actions of police

and the level of trust they create among citizens (Tyler, 2004). Legitimacy, therefore, relates to the

basic question of compliance and cooperation that rest on a widespread belief that “the police are

entitled to call upon the public to follow the law and help combat crime and that members of the

public have an obligation to engage in cooperative behavior” (Tyler, 2004). Obedience is not

necessarily instrumental, based on fear or reward, but also on a sense of shared moral values and

identification grounded in the social and cultural significance of the police. Namely, citizens obey

when they believe that the police operates in ways that accord with the ethical and normative

frameworks of members of community. Conferring legitimacy on police grants it the right to exert

power, partly a stance based on the police being morally justified in the eyes of policed (Jackson et

al, 2013: 12). Trust in the police, discussed above, is the public belief that police have the right

intentions towards citizen and have the ability to provide security, namely that police are fair and

competent.

In multicultural or multiethnic settings, ethnic groups often display different levels of trust

in police and confer different levels of legitimacy. Negative perceptions of police among minority

or non-dominant groups are based on direct or mediated experience that affects trust. Literature and

experience point to two central issues that can be described as "under-policing," the neglect of

minority needs, and "over-policing," an aggressive approach than singles out minorities (Ben-Porat,

2009). Over-policing implies mistreatment of minorities by the police, either by excessive use of

force towards minorities or by discriminatory practices against them (Findlay, 2004:101). "Racial

profiling," the most common practice of over-policing, refers to the use of generalizations based on

race, ethnicity, religion or national origin as the basis for suspicion in directing law enforcement

actions that creates tensions and mistrust between the police and minorities (Closs, 2006; Smith,

2006; Wortley, 2003; Wortley and Tanner, 2003). Under-policing, conversely, is largely about

police neglect of minorities and their needs. Under-policing is manifested in the neglect of poor

and ethnic neighborhoods (Brown and Benedict, 2002) regarded as "hopeless" and, as a result,

suffer from unresponsive policing and high crime rates. Under-policing can also mean the police's

neglect of complaints about racial harassment and the overlooking of domestic violence

characterized by the police as "cultural" or “normative” in these communities (Brunson and Miller,

2006).

Before and during the conflict police was often militarized, politicized, biased and relied on

coercion rather than legitimacy. Oppressed minorities were likely to suffer from both under-

policing, lack of personal security, and over-policing that can extend beyond discrimination and

involve severe human rights violations and oppression. Without change, distrust of police creates a

vicious cycle where police performance is compromised, distrust strengthened and trust further

diminishes. Members of the majority group, conversely, may be satisfied with the police, have an

easier time identifying with it and feel that police provides them with security. This legacy is likely

to make reforms even more difficult and underscore a heated debate between those committed to

the old order – police and the formerly stronger groups – and those that demand complete change

of police.

Police Reform

Post-conflict reconstruction includes the creation of local capacities, economic, political and

legal functions that would ensure governance and stability, among which a legitimate police force

is central. For ethnic groups that struggled against what they perceived as state discrimination,

police was often part of the problem, administering an unjust order rather than serving and

protecting society. The re-building of police is a challenge comparable to what many multi-ethnic

or multicultural states contend with regarding relations between police and minorities. Police

reforms may be necessary when alienation undermines their capacity to operate among and serve

minority communities (Fleras, 1992; Howell, Perry and Vile, 2004; Brunson and Miller, 2006).

Reform requires a willingness of the state and the police to critically examine policies (Kelling and

Moore, 2006; Chan, 1997), develop capabilities to engage with different sectors, overcome its own

biases and prejudices and establish trust essential for its performance. Yet, good will may not be

enough if core problems are not clearly identified and, consequently, reforms are misdirected and

fail to achieve the desired results.

Changes that took place in police forces, making them more educated, diversified and

open than ever before, have not always brought the expected changes (Skalansky, 2007) and the

history of policing is "filled with instances in which police forces throughout the world succeeded

in foiling or diluting reforms" (Weitzer and Tuch, 2006: 124). While in many democratic

countries there is broad support for the general principles of good policing (use of minimum

force, impartiality, fairness and accountability), surprisingly little is known about the level of

popular support for specific kinds of reforms (Weitzer and Tuch, 2006:37). For the police, the

challenges include the provision of services that suit all segments of society, the diversification of

the police force so it will mirror society, an improvement in the image of the police among

minorities, and serious engagement with hate crimes against minorities (Oakley, 2001). Police

reforms in the early twentieth century sought to professionalize the police, to create uniform

standards and make it more effective for crime fighting (Roberg, Kuykendall and Novak, 2002:

49). A change occurred when police in different democratic states shifted from an impersonal,

bureaucratic approach to strategies aimed at gaining legitimacy by greater involvement (Herbert,

2006). Later, a multicultural approach was incorporated that included effective engagement with

different cultural groups, review of discriminatory policies and provision of services designed to

strengthen police legitimacy across society (Chan, 1997; Kelling and Moore, 2006).

Police reforms can be divided into three central areas that together attempt to tackle the

central issues of over-policing and under-policing and enhance the legitimacy and effectiveness of

police: (a) Representation: diversification of the police force; (b) Fairness: training of police

officers and revisions of police practices, and (c) Participation: community policing and civilian

oversight of the police. The relationship between the different reforms and their potential for

making a significant change requires an in-depth study of specific minorities, their needs and

demands (Stenning, 2003), but also may enable generalization if similar patterns appear in different

case studies.

Representation

Representative bureaucracy refers to a bureaucracy that is broadly reflective of identities,

interests and values of society. Representation can be either passive, reflecting the demographic

characteristics of society but maintaining a professional stance, or active, when bureaucrats

represent specific community needs and interests. The theory of representative bureaucracy

suggests that organizations perform better when their workforces reflect their constituent

populations (Andrews et al, 2005). Improved performance, or effectiveness, is the result of

increased legitimacy of the organization among populations previously alienated from it. The mere

presence (passive representation) of minority bureaucrats, or the policies they enact that benefit

their group (active representation) has the potential to increase trust in the organization. In addition,

bureaucrats from minority groups can bring with them cultural knowledge and sensitivities that

improves organization’s performance towards and among minorities. Attempts to diversify

bureaucracy relate to the wider debate over "cultural diversity" in the work place, both private and

public, and its benefits and difficulties (Brief, 2008; Williams and O'Reilly, 1998). Studies of the

effect of representative bureaucracy on minorities reveal a complex picture that includes negative

affect on the work force and its performance (Jarry and Pitts, 2001).

The diversification of the police force can be an important reform. Recruitment of minorities

to the police is significant when the police force, prior to the conflict, was homogeneous, politicized,

associated with the dominant party, and participated in the conflict. Under pressure to erect an

effective police force, recruitment may search for experienced police officers from the past as

ineffective law enforcement by inexperienced police can erode their public credibility and fail to

provide security (Nield, 2006). On the other hand, a non-representative police force is likely to

maintain the "police subculture" that prior to the conflict was politicized, abusive and illegitimate.

Increased representation of groups hitherto excluded on the police force has not only the potential

to narrow the distance between the police and different groups but also change police culture from

within. Research, from multiethnic settings, however, shows no conclusive support that hiring

minority officers will positively affect public perceptions of police (Brown and Benedict, 2002).

Moreover, the assimilation of new recruits to existing police culture or their marginalization to

insignificant roles could limit the impact of diversification (Coderoni, 2002; Desroches, 1992;

Stevens, 2007; Tinor-Centi and Hussain, 2000). Finally, minority groups, especially in post-conflict

situations may be reluctant to join the police force previously associated with abuse and

discrimination. Minorities can be suspicious of police attempts to recruit them, be critical of

minority officers serving in the police and expect major changes in the police before considering to

join the police. Consequently, studies of diversification need to pay attention to recruitment

patterns, overcoming of opposition and the placement of new recruits with the police force.

Particularly, it is important to measure whether the diversification of police has the intended impact

on police legitimacy and the everyday operation of the police.

Fairness

Trust in police as mentioned above depends on public perceptions of its effectiveness and

fairness. While effectiveness, measured in police ability to provide security and control crime, is

critical, the public does not always have the capacity to evaluate police performance. Moreover, in

divided and conflicted societies, expectations from police may differ between groups and police

work will be valued accordingly. Evaluations and perceptions of police derive not only from macro

statistics on crime rates and prevention but also from personal feeling of insecurity and assessment

of fairness based on encounters of citizens with police. Procedural justice, fair and respectful

treatment that follows the rules is more important to people than obtaining favorable results. Thus,

in encounters with police the quality of treatment is more important than the objective outcomes

(Tyler, 2004). Procedural justice relates to police practices and the personal encounter with police

officers, and the assessment of fairness underscores legitimacy and, consequently, compliance with

the law. Thus, when citizens believe they have been treated fairly by police, procedures and

decisions were explained to them and their concerns have been heard, they are more likely to assess

the interaction with police as positive, regardless of whether the outcome was favorable to them

(Ibid).

Police, according to procedural justice models, requires public support and cooperation;

support and cooperation derive from the perceived legitimacy of the police; and, perceived

legitimacy stems in part from the actions of police (Tyler, 2004). Interactions between officials and

the public enhance or erode police legitimacy but there are other sources and influences on the

legitimacy of institutions. People confer legitimacy on institutions not only because they display

fairness in everyday interactions but also because they regard them as representing particular

normative and ethical frameworks, and feeling a “moral alignment” with the institution (Hough et

al., 2010). Furthermore, the assessment of fairness relies not only on personal experience but also

on group perceptions based on its history, relations with the state and its institutions and ability to

identify with both. Among minority groups embedded negative perceptions of police, on the one

hand, and a possible lack of “moral alignment”, on the other hand, suggests that procedural justice

might be difficult to implement.

On a superficial level, a change of perceptions involves the reform of police practices by

training police officers to be “culturally sensitive” (Stevens, 2007). Training alone has limited

impact unless coupled with practical reforms in management, deployment and supervision (Stone

and Ward, 2000). “Cultural training” is relatively easy to implement but might be of limited value

if the problem is deep-rooted racism and animosity towards minorities. Cultural sensitivity might

be superficial and glance over the real issues that are of concern to the minority. More importantly,

training can remain separate from actual behavior and practices as new recruits will receive their

“real” training from senior officers, incorporating the traditional and discriminatory organizational

culture. Tackling discriminatory practices would require a significant effort (rather than formal

statements and training sessions) and consistency in order to change negative perceptions among

minorities. This would include new rules of engagement that could create the necessary moral

alignment, a commitment to uproot discriminatory practices and measures of accountability and

transparency.

Participation

Effective strategies for police reform can draw on lessons learned elsewhere regarding

bottom-up democratic policy planning. Specifically, if stakeholders have no voice in the reforms it

may be difficult for them to embrace them when implemented. Thus, when governments provide

citizens with voice they make them partners in public policy-making. A bottom-up policy reform

means, first, the rejection of "one size fits all" formula and, second, attentiveness to the different

needs that exist among citizens, especially in diverse societies. The police, as other governmental

institutions whose current policies may reflect what they perceive as citizen demands, have also to

take into account "the risks associated with a citizen focused police agenda, namely policing for the

majority at the expense of the minority" (Harrison et al., 2009). In diverse or multicultural societies

police require accurate tools for planning policies that would properly serve all communities.

Surveys are a tool used by more and more agencies, including the police, as part of a bottom-up

strategy designed not only to assess performance but also to capture public perceptions and to help

shape strategy and service delivery to enhance public trust (Harris et al, 2009).

Community policing has been used to describe different initiatives and a generalized model

which “supplements traditional crime fighting with problem-solving and prevention oriented

approaches that emphasize the role of the public in helping set police priorities“ (Skogan, 2006: 3;

see also Fleras, 1992: 74; Roberg, Kuykendall and Novak, 2002: 56). Specific measures include

police officers in the streets, direct engagement with citizens and community leaders, and police

commitment to analyze and solve crime problems (Stone and Ward, 2000). Community policing is

one measure for bridging the gaps between the police and minority communities and includes

principles, policies, and practices that link police and community members together in the joint

pursuit of local crime prevention (Fleras, 1992: 74; Roberg, Kuykendall and Novak, 2002: 56), and

increases police accountability to local communities. Community policing, however, might be

considered, on the one hand, by police and by the minorities themselves as "too soft" and ineffective

and, on the other hand, easier to accomplish with majority communities.

Public and community involvement include forums for engagement with police officials

providing an on-going dialogue between communities and police. These forums can help change

negative perceptions, raise problems police is unaware of and help solve problems and encourage

cooperation. In diverse societies and even more so in post-conflict stages, however, both “public“

and “community“ are contested concepts and involving the public in police work is an

challenging process. Recruiting communities may be even more difficult than recruiting

individual minority officers as the lack of trust and suspicion towards police, on the one hand, and

the difficulty to agree on common goals, on the other hand, makes cooperation difficult.

Community involvement would have to go beyond formal and informal channels for communities

to convey their needs and concerns, but also enable citizens to oversee police work (Lewis, 2005;

Perez, 1994; Stone and Bobb, 2002). Oversight and control of police is done at three levels:

internal police mechanisms, state institutions with capacity to oversee police work and through

institutions of civil society (Stone and Ward, 2000). The latter, civilian police boards are an

example of citizen’s involvement that provides the latter with oversight over the police and gives

civilians a stake in decision-making processes (Lewis, 2005; Perez, 1994; Wortley, 2003). As

such, they are expected to raise strong opposition from police forces, demanding that professional

police work remains independent.

Conclusion

Turning the police from being “part of the problem” into being “part of the solution”

raises many sensitivities and requires uneasy compromises. While the need for security is a

common goal for all groups and security exemplifies the existence of peace, how to provide

security, by what means and for what ends is likely to remain contentious. To trust the police

implies consent and cooperation, and to accept police authority. The organized use of force by a

state against its citizens, even in established and relatively stable democracies, requires constant

democratic oversight, especially when underrepresented minorities are concerned (Stone and

Ward, 2000). “Democratic policing” is the long-term goal for post-conflict societies, a police

force that is accessible and accountable to all groups. In Bayley’s (1997) words it is a form of

policing 'organized to be responsive downwards' to the disaggregated public” and “accountable to

multiple audiences through multiple mechanisms.” What is common to the reforms described

above, potentially part of a comprehensive peace agreement, is the aim to enhance and expand

police legitimacy across the societal divides. Measures of recruitment and training of police

officers, reform of discriminatory practices and the involvement of the community itself in

policing, are all part of police reform and adaptation to a multi-ethnic setting in the post-conflict

stage. However, careful and detailed research is necessary to establish what exactly works and in

which circumstances.

Bibliography

Aitchison, Andy (2007). 'Police Reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina: State, Democracy and

International Assistance' Policing and Society 17(4) pp 321-343

Albercht, H.J. (1997). “Ethnic Minorities, Crime and Criminal Justice in Germany.” in M. Tonry,

Ed., Ethnicity, Crime and Integration, Comparative and Cross-National Perspcetives. Chicago:

Barlow, D. and Barlow, M. (2000). Police in a multicultural society – An American Story.

Minnesota, Waveland Press.

Bayley, David. (2008) “Post-conflict Police Reform: Is Northern Ireland a Model?” Policing 2,2:

233-240.

Ben-Porat, G. (2008). "Policing Multicultural States", Policing and Society 18, 4: 411-425.

Brown, B. and Benedict, W.R. (2002). “Perceptions of the Police”, Policing: an International

Journal of Police Strategies and Management. 25, 3: 543-580.

Brunson, R. and Miller, J. (2006). "Gender, Race and Urban Policing: The Experience of African

American Youths" Gender and Society 20, 4: 531-552.

Casey, John. (2000). "International Experiences in Policing Multicultural Societies" International

Journal of Police Science and Management 3, 2: 165-177.

Coderoni, G. (2002). “The relationship between multicultural training for police and effective law

enforcement,” Perspective: FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin.

Celador, Gemma Collantes. (2005). “Police Reform: Peacebuilding through Democratic

Policing?” International Peacekeeping 12, 3: 364-376

Cekov, Aleksander. (2009). “Police Reform in Macedonia on the Path to EU Integration”

Analytical 4: 47-56.

Chakraborti, N. and Garland, J. (2003). “Under-Researched and Overlooked: An Exploration of

the Attitudes of Rural Minority Ethnic Communities towards Crime, Community Safety and the

Criminal Justice System”, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. 29, 3: 563-572

Decker, S.H. (1985) “The Police and the Public” in Homant, R.J. and Kennedy, D.B. (Eds.),

Police and Law Enforcement, 1975-1981, Vol. 3. New York, NY: AMS Press.

Ellison, Graham (2007) "A Blue Print for Democratic Policing Anywhere in the World?" Police

Quarterly 10, 3: 243-269.

Findlay, M. (2004). Introducing Policing, Challenges for Police and Australian Communities.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Grillot, Suzette R. (2008) “Policing Via Principles: Reforming the Use of Force in the Western

Balkans” East European Politics & Societies, 22, 2: 319-346.

Hays, A. (2012) “Policing in Northern Ireland Community Control, Community Policing, and the

Search for Legitimacy” Urban Affairs Review July 2013 49,4:557-592

Hislope, Robert (2003) “Between a bad peace and a good war: insights and lessons from the

almost-war in Macedonia”. Ethnic and Racial Studies 26, 1: 129-151.

Howell, S.E., Perry, H.L. and Vile, M. (2004). "Black Cities/White Cities: Evaluating the Police."

Political Behavior 26, 1: 54-68.

Hough, Mike et al. (2010) “Procedural Justice, Trust and Institutional Legitimacy” Policing 4(3):

203-210

Ioannides, Isabelle. (2007) “Police Mission in Macedonia” in Emerson, M. and E. Gross (eds.)

Evaluating the EU’s Crisis Missions in the Balkans. Brussels: Center of European Policy Studies.

Kelling, G.L. and Moore, M.H. (2006). "The Evolving Strategy of Policing" in Kappeler, V.E.

(ed.) The Police and Society Illinois: Waveland Press.

Marenin, O. (2005). Building a Global Police Studies Community. Police Quarterly, 8, 99-136

Miall, Hugh, Oliver Ramsbotham and Tom Woodhouse.(1999) Contemporary Conflict

Resolution; The Prevention, Management and Transformation of Deadly Conflicts. London:

Polity Press.

Muehlmann, Thomas. (2008). “Policing Restructuring in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Problems of

Internationally-led security sector reform”. Journal of Intervention and State Building 2, 1: 1-22.

Mulcahy, A. (2006). Policing Northern Ireland: Conflict, Legitimacy and Reform. Willan

Publishing

O’Conner, C. (2008). “Citizens Attitudes Toward the Police in Canada”, Policing: an

International Journal of Police Strategies and Management. 31, 4: 578-595

O’Rawe, M. (2003). Transitional Policing Arrangements in Northern Ireland: The Can't and the

Won't of the Change Dialectic. Fordham International Law Journal, 26, 1015-1073.

Osland, Kari M. 2004 “The EU Police Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina” International

Peacekeeping 11, 3: 544-560

Peake, Gordon. 2004. Policing the Peace: Police Reform Experience in Kosovo, Southern Serbia

and Macedonia. London: Safeworld.

Stenning, P.C. (2003). "Policing the Cultural Kaleidoscope: Recent Canadian Experience," Police

and Society 7, 3: 13-47.

Vejnovic, Dusko and Lalic Veliber. 2006. “Community Policing in a Changing World: A Case

Study of Bosnia and Herzgovina” Police Practice and Research 6, 4: 363-373.

Weizer, R. and S. Tuch. (2004). Rethinking Minority Attitudes toward the Police. Washington

DC: George Washington University.

Werner, Suzanne. 1999. "The Precarious Nature of Peace: Resolving the Issues, Enforcing the

Settlement, and Renegotiating the Terms," American Journal of Political Science 43(3): 912-934.

Wortley, S. and Owusu-Bempah, A, (2009). “Unequal before the Law: Immigrant and Racial

Minority Perceptions of the Canadian Criminal Justice System”, International Migration and

Integration 10: 447-473