Weaknesses Of Civilian Oversight

Assignment #2
This assignment discusses the need for collaborative programming in regards to the article “Civilian oversight as a public good: democratic policing, civilian oversight, and the social” written by Danielle Hryniewicz. The article “The Role and Attitudes of Restorative Board Members: A Case Study of Volunteers in Community Justice” written by Karp, Bazemore, and Chesire helps further the understanding of how community and social justice programs are important.
Civilian Oversight of Police Internal Affairs Issues and Complaint Processes
In my opinion, civilian oversight of police internal affairs issues and complaint processes is an appropriate practice. The practice is appropriate due to “issues of police accountability and legitimacy.”
(Hryniewicz, 2011). By allowing citizens to contribute to police internal affairs, leaves room for improvement within policing. “Given the importance of the citizens’ role in policing projects, the police must understand themselves as subservient to the community, and allow for citizens to evaluate police performance and assist in the construction of police policy” (Herbert, 2006).
Strengths and Weakness of Civilian Oversight of Police Misconduct Issues The strength of civilian oversight is shown through “the external investigation of police complaints [which] provides citizens with a mechanism by which they can reaffirm their social values; citizens are able to critically question and influence state proceedings.” (Hryniewicz, 2011).
Another positive is in regards to public security, “civilian oversight is a primary and fundamental example of a ‘public good’; a good that is a prerequisite to the generation of other political goods.” (Loader & Walker, 2001). One weakness may be that civilian trust in the police may not be fully restored solely due to civilian oversight. Overall, the strengths of this practice seem to overcome the weaknesses.
Civilian Oversight Positively Influences Police Incorporation of Community and Social Justice Practices
I believe that there are positive influences of police incorporation of community and social justice practices. “The presence of civilians within police complaint processes is said to enhance police credibility, accountability, and ultimately, public confidence in police services” (Watt, 1991). This approach to justice allows for positive growth among the community and the police.
“The Role and Attitudes of Restorative Board Members: A Case Study of Volunteers in Community
Justice”
This article focuses on citizens as volunteers working specifically with Vermont Reparative Probation Boards. “In this program, board members meet with probationers to negotiate a “reparative contract” that may include apologies, restitution, community service, and other tasks. We found a board membership that is generally representative of the community, highly supportive of the program, and knowledgeable of restorative justice principles.” (Karp, Bazemore, & Chesire, 2004). The article discusses further how the authors explored “the characteristics of this community/government partnership as board volunteers view it by examining their attitudes about the program and the sponsoring agency, the Vermont Department of Corrections (VDOC)” (Karp, Bazemore, & Chesire, 2004)
VRP Community and Social Justice Program Addresses Issues in Corrections
Vermont’s Reparative Probation Program is a community and social justice program which focuses on the issues of corrections.
This article further analyzed the volunteers themselves in order to obtain a better idea of how well this program is working. “The results of the current survey suggest that board members are generally representative of the community in terms of race and sex. There is great diversity in income level, religiosity, and political orientation.” (Karp, Bazemore, & Chesire, 2004).
I believe that this program is effective due to the positive response by the volunteers of “their experience of satisfaction with the program: 92% agreed that they were satisfied with their experience. Moreover, participation has generally increased members’ enthusiasm for volunteering, their sense of community, empathy for victims and offenders, and their commitment to the philosophy of restorative justice.” (Karp, Bazemore, & Chesire, 2004). However, one weakness of the program is that the “demographic difference creates social distance, in which neither side fully understands the other” (Pranis, 2001). This is proven by “comparing board members to the probationers they see, who are disproportionately poorly educated, younger, and men.” (Karp, Bazemore, & Chesire,
2004).

Link to the second article: http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezp.lib.cwu.edu/ehost/command/detail?sid=fecdc387-25b8-4a69-931f-e80a8b8ac6a6%40sessionmgr4008&vid=6&hid=4210 References
Herbert, S. (2006). Civilians, cops, and power: Recognizing the limits of community. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Hryniewicz, D. (2011, March 22). Civilian oversight as a public good: democratic policing, civilian. Contemporary Justice Review, 14, 1. London, Ontario, Canada: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.
Karp, D. R., Bazemore, G., & Chesire, J. D. (2004, October). The Role and Attitudes of Restorative Board Members: A Case Study of Volunteers in Community Justice. EBSCOhost, 50(4), 29. doi:10.1177/0011128703260262 Loader, I., & Walker, N. (2001). Policing as a public good: Reconstituting the connections between policing and the state. Theoretical Criminology, 5(1), 9–35
Pranis, K. (2001). Democratizing social control: Restorative justice, social justice, and the empowerment of marginalized populations. In G. Bazemore & M. Schiff (Eds.), Restorative community justice (pp. 357-378). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
Watt, S. (1991). The future of civilian oversight of policing. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 3(33), 347–362.