Handbook on

Policing in Central and Eastern Europe

Gorazd Meko

Charles B. Fields
Branko Lobnikar

Andrej Sotlar
Editors
Handbook on
Policing in Central
and Eastern Europe

Editors
Gorazd Meko
Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security
University of Maribor
Ljubljana , Slovenia
Branko Lobnikar
Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security
University of Maribor
Ljubljana , Slovenia
Charles B. Fields
College of Justice and Safety
Eastern Kentucky University
Richmond , KY, USA
Andrej Sotlar
Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security
University of Maribor
Ljubljana , Slovenia
ISBN 978-1-4614-6719-9 ISBN 978-1-4614-6720-5 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-6720-5
Springer New York Heidelberg Dordrecht London
Library of Congress Control Number: 2013935217
Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or
part of the material is concerned, speci cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on micro lms or in any other physical way,
and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software,
or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this
legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material
supplied speci cally for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for
exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication of this publication or parts thereof is
permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publishers location, in its
current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer. Permissions for
use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center. Violations are liable
to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a speci c statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of
publication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility
for any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or
implied, with respect to the material contained herein.
Printed on acid-free paper
Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)
v
Foreword
Thirty years ago (in the early 1980s), very little information was publicly
available about even the most basic features of the police in Central- and
East-European countries. The police/militia were covered by the veil of
secrecy. Raising questions about the police/militia and their accountability
by an interested citizen could have potentially resulted in a handcuffed visit
to the inside of police headquarters, and time served in a state prison. Nearly
a quarter of a century ago (in 1989), the fall of the Berlin wall symbolized
the end of the communist regimes in Central- and East-European countries,
the beginning of the process of embracing of democratic ideas, and the ini-
tiation of a complex transition processes. Whereas the reforms had started
throughout most Central and Eastern Europe at the time, the wars in the
former Yugoslavia (in the 1990s) were taking a tremendous toll on the soci-
eties affected by them and, consequently, hindered the progress of the tran-
sitional reforms.
Today (in the early 2010s), the editors of this volume, Meko, Fields,
Lobnikar, and Sotlar, provide us with an opportunity to obtain an extensive
and detailed account of the state of police and policing in 12 Central- and
East-European countries in transition (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia,
the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro,
Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, and Slovenia), an established European democracy
(Austria) and an established democracy which merged with a former com-
munist country (Germany). This task would have been virtually impossible
20 or 30 years ago. As a comparative policing scholar who has been in the
profession and has contributed to the literature over the past 20 years, I draw
upon my rst-hand experience to state my steadfast belief that such a book is
long overdue.
As the book before you elegantly demonstrates, the transitional processes
are quite complex. They have affected both the conceptual and the organiza-
tional/functional aspects of policing. The police reforms in these countries
have been driven by the goals of transforming the former militia, character-
ized with a longer history of protecting the regime and abusing citizens
human rights, into a democratic police agency. The buzz words used in the
reforms included depoliticization , demilitarization , professionalization , spe-
cialization , demysti cation , downsizing , decentralization , centralization , and
decriminalization .
Although the goals of the reforms across various countries do not overlap
completely, there appears to be a shared set of key characteristics common to
vi Foreword
democratic policing. In the manuscript, Democratizing the Police Abroad ,
David Bayley (2001: 76) underscored these commonalities:
During the 1990s, a consensus developed internationally about the norms of demo-
cratic policing. Few people would disagree with accountability, protection of human
rights, and transparency, and most would accept the importance of developing a
service orientation. The elements of democratic police reform are no longer
problematic.
Lifting the veil of secrecy is one of the key requirements for the establish-
ment of police accountability in a democratic society (Greenwood & Huisman,
2006); there could be no accountability to the public and other external bod-
ies if no information is available on what the police are doing and how they
are doing it. Greenwood and Huisman (2006: 5) described transparency as:
the idea that (metaphorically speaking) there is, or should be, a glazed window
or windows through which it is possible to see how the business of government is
being carried on in a state, region, municipality (or, indeed, in any public organiza-
tion). Seeing here implies both a willingness on the part of the authorities
(or insiders) to show what they are doing and the ability of elected representatives,
the media and society-at-large (or outsiders) to view what is going on.
Democratic police agencies should have a duty to make their business
transparent and the external bodies should have the right to know and thus be
able to hold the police accountable (Greenwood & Huisman, 2006). As the
former communist countries embarked on the transition, the expectation has
been that the veil should be lifted and police activities should become trans-
parent. As the contributions demonstrate, this indeed seems to be a common
pattern across the countries in transition. Keetovi (Serbia) vividly illus-
trates the change in the relationship between the police and the media in
Serbia before and after the end of Miloevis authoritarian regime. The
police maintained the relationship only with journalists from the of cial
media outlets and excluded the opposition journalists from any media events,
labeled them as enemies, kept them under surveillance, banned them, seized
their equipment, and even imprisoned them. The post-democratic revolution
resulted in substantially more freedom for the media. Kekovi and Kentera
(Montenegro) argue that, despite the changes in the legislature and the
signi cant progress achieved so far, the police of cers still need to over-
come the legacy of secrecy and understand that transparency helps them build
connections with the community, and the citizens have an uphill battle if
they seek to obtain information from the police. Kekovi and Kentera stipu-
late that, [t]here remains a mind-set that the public has to justify their right
to information rather than the Ministry of the Interior or the Police
Administration having to justify that certain information is classi ed. The
establishment of the public relations of ce or spokesperson (e.g., Kovo &
Borovec; Muharremi & Mehmeti) further contributes toward the lifting of the
veil of secrecy.
The militia in the communist societies tended to protect the regime and
serve the leadership of the communist party. The conceptual shift required for
democratization implies that police must be accountable to law rather than
to government (Bayley, 2005: 19). Marenin and Caparini (2005: 225) dis-
cuss the same concept as semi-autonomy and argue that semi-autonomy
vii Foreword
means that the police should have the right (and are expected) to exercise
their professional judgments relatively free from direct societal or state direc-
tives. Sergevnin and Kovalyov (Russia) present the case of a slowly changing
police system in Russia in which the appointments at the higher level of the
hierarchy are [still] highly political and require loyalty rather than profes-
sionalism and competence. By imposing another layer of the federal govern-
ment, the 2010 legal reform sought to eliminate potential in uence of the
local politicians on the local police, but the majority of the surveyed citizens
in an opinion poll thought that the changes were merely decorative.
However, as Muharremi and Mehmeti (Kosovo) point out, it may be really
dif cult for the police to achieve political independence and operational
independence, particularly in a highly corrupt country. Similarly, Leyrer
(Hungary) wrote that it is dif cult to nd the right balance between needed
political support and unwanted political in uence; [p]olice work of course
should be free from political in uence, but at the same time it is true that the
duties cannot be carried out successfully without the support of the respective
political parties.
The theoretical idea of accountability/semi-autonomy should be accompa-
nied by the appropriate legislative changes and the establishment of the actual
mechanisms of accountability. Indeed, many contributors also describe the
nature of various internal and external controls of the police. ikman and
Lali (Bosnia and Herzegovina) focus on the establishment of internal mech-
anisms of accountability in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which cover hiring,
work performance, promotion, rewards, as well as discipline and dismissal
from the service. Keetovi (Serbia) describes the administrative investiga-
tion initiated with the submission of a complaint. Kekovi and Kentera
(Montenegro) also list the internal control department as the key method of
internal accountability. Foltin, Rohl, and ikolov (Czech Republic) analyze
the role of the General Inspection of Security Forces, whose Director is
appointed by the Minister of the Interior, and argue that they are the only
of ce entrusted with the task of investigating police of cers misconduct;
there are no external control mechanisms, such as an ombudsman or a citizen
review, devoted to the control of police misconduct. It is by no means surpris-
ing that the current reform of the police determines the creation of effective
mechanisms of control, both internal and external, as one of the ten funda-
mental building blocks of the reform.
While the internal control seems to be prevalent in some countries, a few
other countries include a combination of internal and external mechanisms of
control, both domestic (e.g., ombudsman, constitutional court, parliament)
and international (e.g., European Court of Human Rights, European
Committee for the Prevention of Torture). Reitps et al. (Slovak Republic)
emphasize the oversight role performed by the National Council and
Government of the Slovak Republic. Keetovi (Serbia) also lists the parlia-
mentary oversight (the Committee for Defense and Security) as the main
form of external control of the police, with NGOs, the media, and the
Ombudsman sharing the role. Kekovi and Kentera (Montenegro) list the
Parliamentary Committee, the Council for Citizens Control of Police Work,
the Ombudsman, NGOs, and the media as external mechanisms of control
viii Foreword
used in Montenegro. They argued that, while the NGOs are capable of
engaging in the control of the police, Montenegros media is unable to do so.
On the other hand, Feltes, Marquardt, and Schwarz (Germany) emphasize the
critical role of the press in the control of German police as a democratic
organ of control.
Mireva and Rajkovevski (Macedonia) start by describing the internal
mechanisms of control (e.g., the Unit for Internal Control and Professional
Standards , Bureau for Public Security) in Macedonia and continue by describ-
ing the external system of control, involving Parliamentary committees, the
Ombudsman, and NGOs. Meko et al. (Slovenia) discuss one of the most
complex systems of external control, involving both domestic and interna-
tional actors. They describe the parliamentary oversight of security and intel-
ligence, the Constitutional Court, the Ombudsman, and the prosecutors as the
domestic external control mechanisms and the European Court and the
European Committee for the Prevention of Torture as the international exter-
nal mechanisms of control. Reitps et al. (Slovak Republic) bring another
interesting point as they accentuate the citizens role; [p]olice of cers are
considered and evaluated from the point of view of their professional roles,
in the form of demands, expectations, and suggestions about how a police
of cer should behave and act.
The police in a democracy are expected not only to abide by the rule of law
in general, but also to actively protect the citizens human rights, from the
right to freedom of speech and association to freedom from arbitrary arrest
and search (see Bayley, 2005). Indeed, the contributions in the book demon-
strate the evolution of the cultures of protection of human rights, from laying
the foundation by declaring what these protected rights are in the constitution
(e.g., Meko et al.; Keetovi; Foltin, Rohl, & ikolov; Mireva &
Rajkovevski; Leyrer) and enacting the laws that limit police powers (e.g.,
Meko et al.; Kovo & Borovec; Kekovi & Kentera; Foltin, Rohl, &
ikolov; Muharremi & Mehmeti; Leyrer; Tabur; Sergevnin & Kovalyov) to
establishing the mechanisms of control and disciplining or punishing the
police for violations of these rules (e.g., Kovo & Borovec; Meko et al.;
Reitps et al.; Mireva & Rajkovevski).
The stories of Serbia and Slovenia which, until 20 years ago, were both
part of the former Yugoslavia, are quite illustrative. Serbia (Keetovi) has
long tolerated using the police to protect the regime; democratization did not
start until after the democratic revolution of 2000. For more than a decade,
the police role was to protect the Miloevi regime and suppress any demo-
cratic movements. The police were ineffective in dealing with crime; they
protected organized crime and even actively engaged in it; they regularly vio-
lated the anti-regime protesters rights, and harassed the journalists. In the
process, the police avoided any accountability expected of the democratic
police, be it established by internal or external mechanisms of control. From
2001, the Serbian police have engaged in a reform, guided by the interna-
tional community. However, Keetovi emphasizes that, although police
of cials generated positive reviews of the reform, independent scholars,
NGOs, and foreign experts remain unimpressed with it. Indeed, the results of
a public opinion survey conducted in 2008 show that the majority of the
ix Foreword
respondents perceive that the police are (still) an instrument to protect the
interests of the Government.
On the other hand, as Meko et al. describe, the groundwork of the
accountability of the police and the protection of citizens rights in Slovenia
has been set very early, immediately after the accession from the former
Yugoslavia. Indeed, the Slovenian police are now subject to both interna-
tional external control by the European Court of Human Rights and the
European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and the domestic external
control by the Constitutional Court, the Ombudsman, and the prosecutors
(Meko et al.). Numerous rulings, recommendations, and changes helped
improve the situation in Slovenia dramatically, but it presently by no means
is perfect (Meko et al.).
Lastly, the top priority of the police should be to service the needs of the
community (Bayley, 2005). For the countries in transition, used to the legacy
of the communist militia, the transition should include a substantial shift in
how priorities are determined, from the idea that the police should protect the
regime and serve the needs of the powerful leaders in the communist party to
the view of the police as public servants. Muharremi and Mehmeti (Kosovo)
chronicle the status of the police during a totalitarian regime (19901999):
the totalitarian regime used the police organization as a tool to achieve
their own goals, and this use of police force did not respect the existing laws
and rules. Misuse of police powers was not reported, the population ignored
cooperation with the police, and corruption was open. Expressions like
Community policing or Serving the people were not known at all.
Similarly, Leyrer (Hungary) describes that the Hungarian police suddenly
had to be transformed into an institution that serves and protects. In fact, to
emphasize the importance of the changes in the late 1990s, Tabur (Estonia)
made the shift from the police force into the police service a part of his con-
tribution title.
Changes in the legislature or the police reform packages require a crucial
shift for the police in the Central- and East-European countries in transition.
Mireva and Rajkovevski (Macedonia) mention that, as part of the 2001
police reforms, the police force has been made into the public service. The
law in Serbia (Keetovi) de nes the police as a public service. Similarly,
Meko et al. (Slovenia) point out that the current police slogan, to protect
and serve, vividly demonstrates the new vision of the police functions.
The contributions demonstrate the shift in the perceptions of what police
functions should be from what they used to be 20 or 30 years ago. Today, the
police are expected to perform a variety of heterogeneous and often complex
tasks, from the more traditional ones, such as the protection of life and prop-
erty, prevention and detection of crime, the arrests of offenders, and regula-
tion of traf c, to the more unique ones, such as the protection of state borders,
control of movement of foreigners, protection of state dignitaries, and protec-
tion of diplomatic missions. In a manner characteristic of democratic societ-
ies, none of these tasks require the police to serve the regime.
The contributions in the book clearly show that the reforms of the police
in these countries are directly affected by the events in the societies at large.
A number of these countries have already become members of the European
x Foreword
Union (e.g., the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia) or slated to become
members soon (e.g., Croatia), and thus needed to adjust their legislation in
line with the European Union requirements. Other countries (e.g., Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, Serbia) face multiple challenges ahead of
them before they will be in this position. Some countries (e.g., Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Macedonia) experienced wars, which inter-
fered with the transition and depleted their resources. Other countries (e.g.,
Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Russia) faced strong totalitarian regimes, cou-
pled with high corruption, nepotism, and organized crime, which severely
hampered the start of the democratization process. Yet, a few countries
(Germany, Czech Republic, Slovak Republic, Slovenia) experienced rela-
tively smooth sailing in their transition. While the key ideas associated with
the transition from the old communist militia toward a democratic police
agency might initially have been similar across these countries, the chal-
lenges, obstacles, and solutions to the transitional dilemmas were as unique
as the countries themselves. The contributions in this book make for a strik-
ing reading that unequivocally shows how diverse the challenges that the
countries could face in pursuit of the same or very similar key ideas.
East Lansing, MI, USA Sanja

Kutnjak

Ivkovi

References
Bayley, D. (2001). Democratizing the police abroad: What to do and how to do it .
Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
Bayley, D. (2005). Changing the guard: Developing democratic police abroad . New York:
Oxford University Press.
Greenwood, D., & Huisman, S. (Eds.). (2004). Transparency and accountability of police
forces, security services and intelligence services . Geneva: Geneva Centre for the
Democratic Control of Armed Forces.
Marenin, O., & Caparini, M. (2005). Reforming the police in Central and Eastern European
states. In C. B. Fields, & R. H. Moore, Jr. (Eds.), Comparative and international criminal
justice: Traditional and nontraditional systems of law and control (pp. 217242). Long
Grove: Waveland Press.
xi
Contents
Introduction to Handbook on Policing in Central
and Eastern Europe .............................................................................. 1
Gorazd Meko, Charles B. Fields,
Branko Lobnikar, and Andrej Sotlar
Policing in Central and Eastern Europe
as an Epiphenomenon of Geopolitical Events .................................... 5
Paul Ponsaers
Policing in Austria: Development over the Past
20 YearsPresent State and Future Challenges ................................ 15
Maximilian Edelbacher and Gilbert Norden
Policing in Croatia: The Main Challenges
on the Path to Democratic Policing ..................................................... 31
Irma Kovo Vukadin, Krunoslav Borovec,
and Tajana Ljubin Golub
Policing in the Czech Republic: Evolution and Trends ..................... 57
Pavel Foltin, Andrej Rohl, and Mria ikolov
Policing in Estonia: From Police Force to Police Service .................. 81
Lauri Tabur
Policing in Germany: Developments in the Last 20 Years ................ 93
Thomas Feltes, Uwe Marquardt, and Stefan Schwarz
Finding the Right Path of Policing in Hungary .................................. 115
Richard Leyrer
Policing in the Republic of Kosovo: Changes Along
with Political and Social Developments .............................................. 129
Driton Muharremi and Samedin Mehmeti
Policing in the Republic of Macedonia ................................................ 143
Stojanka Mireva and Rade Rajkovevski
Montenegrin Police: Current Prole and Future Trends .................. 169
Zoran Kekovi and Savo Kentera
xii Contents
Policing in Russia .................................................................................. 191
Vladimir Sergevnin and Oleg Kovalyov
Serbian Police: Troubled Transition from Police Force
to Police Service ..................................................................................... 217
elimir M. Keetovi
Policing in the Slovak Republic: The Organization
and Current Problems of Police Work ................................................ 239
Josef Reitps, Libor Gapierik, Kamil Boc,
and Miroslav Felcan
Recent Developments of Policing in Slovenia ..................................... 263
Gorazd Meko, Branko Lobnikar, Maja Jere, and Andrej Sotlar
A New Concept of the Police and Policing in Republika
Srpska (Bosnia and Herzegovina) ....................................................... 287
Mile ikman and Velibor Lali
Index ...................................................................................................... 305
xiii
Contributors
Kamil Boc , Ph.D., is a lecturer at the Department of Security Management,
Faculty of Special Engineering, University of ilina, Slovakia. His research
interests include criminology and evaluation of crime prevention.
Krunoslav Borovec is Assistant Director General and Head of Police
Directorate in Croatia. Mr. Borovec is a Ph.D. student at the Faculty of Special
Education and Rehabilitation, University of Zagreb. His research interests
include crime prevention and police-public relations.
Maximilian Edelbacher is a Board member of the Austrian Association of
Criminal Investigators.
Miroslav Felcan , Ph.D., is Lieutenant Colonel, working in the Of ce of the
President of the Police Force of the Republic of Slovakia.
Thomas Feltes , Ph.D., is Professor in the Department of Criminology,
Criminal Police and Police Science, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany.
Charles B. Fields , Ph.D., is Professor of Criminal Justice in the College of
Justice and Safety at Eastern Kentucky University, USA. His research inter-
ests include comparative justice systems and drug policy.
Pavel Foltin , Ph.D., Lieutenant Colonel, Vice-Dean at the Faculty of
Economics and Management, University of Defense, Brno, Czech Republic.
His research interests include eld logistics support, supply chain security,
and international security environment.
Libor Gapierik , Ph.D. , is Associate Professor, deputy head of the
Department of Security Management at the Faculty of Special Engineering,
University of ilina, Slovakia. His research includes crime prevention and
terrorism.
Maja Jere , B.A., is a Junior Research fellow and Ph.D. student at the Faculty
of Criminal Justice and Security, University of Maribor, Slovenia. Her doc-
toral research includes community policing and police-resident relationships.
Zoran Kekovi , Ph.D., is Professor at the Faculty of Security, University of
Belgrade, Serbia. His research interests include security systems, crisis
management, and risk analysis.
xiv Contributors
Savo Kentera , Ph.D., is the President of the Atlantic Council of Montenegro.
His eld of research includes international relations and security, national
security, and intelligence services.
elimir M. Keetovi , Ph.D., is Associate Professor and a head of the Human
Resources Management Department at the Faculty of Security Studies
University of Belgrade, Serbia. His main research interests include crisis man-
agement, civil security, and police-public relations.
Oleg Kovalyov , J.D., Ph.D., is Professor and Academician of the Russian
Academy of Natural Sciences. He works at the Department of Economic
Security at the Faculty of Political Science and Law of the Russian Economic
University named after G.V. Plekhanov. His research interests include orga-
nizational, legal, and psychological issues in the Russian criminal justice
system.
Irma Kovo Vukadin , Ph.D., is Professor of Behavioral Disorders and Head
of the Department of Criminology, Faculty of Education and Rehabilitation
Sciences, University of Zagreb. She has conducted research on crime, policing,
corrections, crime victims, and fear of crime.
Sanja Kutnjak Ivkovi , S.J.D., Ph.D. is Professor in the School of Criminal
Justice, Michigan State University. She holds a doctorate in criminology
(University of Delaware) and a doctorate in law (Harvard University). Her
research focuses on comparative and international criminology, criminal jus-
tice, and law.
Velibor Lali , M.A., is a doctoral candidate at the Faculty of Security Studies,
University of Belgrade, Serbia. He is a researcher at the NGO European
Defendology Center, Banja Luka, Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and
Herzegovina.
Richard Leyrer is Justice and Home Affairs Counselor in Brussels and a
Ph.D. student in Hungary. His doctoral research focuses on international
police information exchange. He also graduated from the FBI National
Academy in Quantico (#238).
Tajana Ljubin Golub , Ph.D., is Associate Professor at Faculty of Education,
University of Zagreb, Croatia. Her research is in the eld of forensic
psychology.
Branko Lobnikar , Ph.D., is Associate Professor of Security Organizations
and Head of the Department of Security Studies at the Faculty of Criminal
Justice and Security, University of Maribor, Slovenia. His research interests
include policing, integrity, and workplace deviance.
Uwe Marquardt is a lawyer and a senior police of cer. He teaches in the
Masters Program in Criminal Justice, Governance and Police Sciences at the
Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany. His research is related to international
(police) peacekeeping.
xv Contributors
Samedin Mehmeti , M.Sc., is a Ph.D. candidate and former police Lieutenant
Colonel in Kosovo. His research interests are security, prevention, and com-
bating organized crime and terrorism.
Gorazd Meko , Ph.D., is Professor of Criminology and Dean of the Faculty
of Criminal Justice and Security, University of Maribor, Slovenia, and a
visiting scholar at the Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, UK
(20102014). His research interests include policing, violence, and fear of
crime.
Stojanka Mireva , Ph.D., is Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Security,
Skopje, University of St. Kliment Ohridski, Bitola, Macedonia. Her main
areas of research are police organization, human rights, victimology, and vio-
lence against women.
Driton Muharremi , M.Sc., is a Ph.D. candidate and lecturer at the AAB
University in Pristine, Kosovo and a Criminal Judge in the Court of Appeals,
Pristine, Kosovo.
Gilbert Norden , Ph.D., is a researcher at the Institute of Sociology, University
of Vienna, Austria.
Paul Ponsaers , Ph.D., is Senior Professor Emeritus at Ghent University,
Faculty of Law, Department of Penal Law and Criminology. He graduated in
Sociology and has a doctorate in Criminology. He is president of the Flemish
Centre of Police Studies. He specialised in the eld of Community Policing,
Financial & Economic Crime, and Security Policy.
Rade Rajkovevski is a Ph.D. student and teaching assistant in the Department
of Police Sciences at the Faculty of Security in Skopje, University St. Kliment
Ohridski, Bitola, Macedonia. His research interests include policing and con-
temporary security issues.
Josef Reitps , Ph.D . , is Professor and Head of the Department of Security
Management at the Faculty of Special Engineering, University of ilina,
Slovakia. His research includes security plans and breakthrough performance
of construction elements.
Andrej Rohl , Ph.D., is Deputy-Director of the Police College and Secondary
Policy School of the Ministry of the Interior in Holeov, Czech Republic. His
research interests include transporting hazardous materials in traf c safety.
Stefan Schwarz is a senior police of cer in the State Police of North Rhine-
Westphalia, Germany. He is a lecturer at the Cologne University of Public
Administration and a module coordinator for International Peacekeeping in the
Masters Program in Criminal Justice, Governance and Police Sciences at the
Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany.
Vladimir Sergevnin , Ph.D., is Director of the Center for Applied Criminal
Justice, Western Illinois University and Editor of the Law Enforcement
Executive Forum Journal , and Assistant Professor in the School of Law
Enforcement and Justice Administration, Western Illinois University, USA.
xvi Contributors
Andrej Sotlar , Ph.D., is Assistant Professor of Security Systems and Vice-
dean at the Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security, University of Maribor,
Slovenia. His research interests include security policy making, plural polic-
ing, private security, and provision of safety/security.
Mile ikman , LL.D., is Head of the Police Education Administration in the
Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina. He
teaches Organized Crime and Criminal Investigation at the College for Internal
Affairs in Banja Luka, Republic of Srpska.
Mria ikolov , Ph.D., is Deputy-Director of the Language Training Center,
University of Defense, Brno, Czech Republic. Her research interests include
language testing and methodology of teaching languages.
Lauri Tabur is Rector of the Estonian Academy of Security Sciences. He
served as Director of National Criminal Intelligence Service and Head of
Security Policy Planning Department in the Estonian Ministry of the Interior.
His research interests include public policy with special respect to the national
security.