Ethics of Internal Affairs Investigations

1
Introduction
To violate the law while on the job is what we call police misconduct, and it occurs when

officers fail in their constitutional duty to protect and serve the public. Police brutality, police

corruption, racial profiling, misuse of surveillance powers, and off-duty misbehaviour all fall

under the umbrella term "misconduct." Special teams within the IAD (internal affair

department) and the PSU (professional standard unit) are responsible for investigating

civilian complaints against the police. All allegations levelled against a police officer fall

under one of the following broad categories: criminal activity, use of excessive force, illegal

arrest or search, unequal treatment or behaviour, and other major breaches of departmental

policy. Whenever a complaint is lodged, an inquiry must follow. When conducting an

investigation, it is necessary to speak with the officer and the complainant separately and

together with the goal of gathering as much information as possible. The PO may be placed

on administrative leave awaiting the results of an inquiry into whether or not he is unfit for

duty or poses a danger to himself or others as a result of his actions. In addition to suspension

without pay and promotion, other disciplinary measures might include counselling, loss of

holiday or vacation time, transfer, or reassignment. Besides having an adverse effect on the

officer, themselves, this causes further tension among the police force and the criminal justice

system as a whole. (Liederbach, Boyd, Taylor, & Kawucha, 2007).

The quality of investigations into police corruption and wrongdoing has always been low.

Major flaws have been identified by several police commissions across the world, including

those in the United States, Australia, and elsewhere. Some of the problems that have been

uncovered include improper investigation planning, insufficient use of electronic

surveillance, failure to question important witnesses, breaches of confidentiality, and delays

in the completion of the inquiry. (Miller, 2010)

2
This article will outline three methods used to investigate police in various jurisdictions and

will focus on the ethical difficulties raised by the investigation process itself. Finally, I will

discuss what should be done to conduct an internal inquiry in an ethical manner.

Models of Internal Affairs Investigation

The dependent model, the interdependent model, and the independent model are three

approaches utilized for internal investigations in various regimes.

In the dependent paradigm, police agencies are tasked with investigating claims made against

their own personnel or those of rival agencies. Investigators in a dependent model have

greater legitimacy among police because they are well-versed in the local police culture and

understand the department's values. In addition, officers under investigation are more likely

to cooperate with the investigation because they know the investigator will be coming from

within. In contrast, the main argument against using a dependent model of inquiry is on the

lack of responsibility placed on subject police. Investigators that share the same subculture

are unable to maintain their objectivity and are hence responsible for the lack of oversight.

An inquiry that lacks impartiality risks being discredited by the public. (McCartney & Parent,

2015)

In the interdependent model, investigators may look into complaints against personnel of

their own department or another agency under civilian control. This model's strength is the

demonstration of impartial supervision of the probe. The public may have faith that neither

the police nor the civilian parties will have an unfair advantage thanks to this. In addition,

members of the community may provide their thoughts and ideas on how to proceed with the

inquiry from a civilian point of view. The difficulty to get police assistance in the event they

choose not to assist with the inquiry is one of the many points of criticism. As a result of their

3
training and expertise, police officers may be hesitant to accept the instructions of citizens

who aren't familiar with the intricacies of an investigation. (McCartney & Parent, 2015)

In the independent model, the complaints are received by a civilian organization that then

initiates and completes the inquiry without any involvement from the police enforcement

agency. Due to the impartiality of the investigators, the public typically favors this approach

since it provides more oversight of police conduct. By using an impartial paradigm, residents

may report police misbehavior without worrying about retaliation or being portrayed as the

"them" in a "us vs them" interview. Critics of this approach say that private investigators may

not be able to fully comprehend police methods and culture, or that they simply lack the

necessary knowledge to conduct thorough criminal investigations. The inability of private

investigators to earn the confidence of law enforcement authorities would also prevent them

from gaining access to vital investigative resources like confidential informants and personal

relationships with their subjects. (McCartney & Parent, 2015)

Ethics of Internal Affairs Investigation

For punishment to be effectively implemented, it is necessary for the law enforcement

executive to delegate authority over the disciplinary process to certain units and supervisors

within the agency. Even though there may be many tiers of power within an agency, the

failure to enforce disciplinary measures at any level will have a negative impact on the

agency as a whole. Establishing who has the power to institute punishments is a crucial part

of managing the organisation. Supervisory staff members need to have discretion and

independence to carry out their duties as leaders. Supervisory staff members need to be well-

versed on agency regulations in order to effectively use this discretion. Supervisory

employees may be authorised to apply particular disciplinary actions (subject to permission

by the law enforcement executive) such as oral reprimands or performance notes, written

reprimands, and suspensions, depending on the size and demands of the individual agency.

4
And the boss should be able to propose further disciplinary measures in writing. The agency's

disciplinary rules and regulations should make it crystal clear what actions fall under this

power. Investigators in the department of internal affairs should be proactive, creative, and

dedicated to the agency's goals and the role of internal affairs. They need to be really

determined and proactive. The investigator in internal affairs has to strike a healthy balance

between professional dedication and personal and group affiliations. Employees in internal

affairs need to be honest to a fault and have the wherewithal to carry out activities that are

unpopular with the general populace. These detectives must be able to handle the stress of

their profession, as well as the challenges of conducting complicated investigations while

under the scrutiny of the public and working long hours. The ability to use tact while

interacting with department and community members is a prerequisite for the investigator.

Workers in the agency's internal affairs section should make themselves available to the

public at large. It's worth stressing that a police supervisor's responsibilities extend well

beyond the confines of policing the force's internal workings and the performance of his or

her subordinates. They should "set the tone" for the organization's commitment to ethics by

acting with the utmost integrity in their day-to-day roles. Promoting a culture of integrity

inside the company may also be done by highlighting the efforts of officers who constantly

protect human rights. Among the many possible methods for doing so is publicizing the

efforts of officers to comply with human rights legislation in internal newsletters and on

social media. Indicating to upper management that they are valued via the highlighting of

best practices would be an important signal of the importance of putting integrity standards

into action. (Internal Affairs Policy & Procedures, 2000)

It doesn't matter what time it is or what day of the week it is, anybody may register a

complaint about an officer's misbehaviour. This includes information from minors and

anyone who are currently in the custody of law enforcement. If there is a person in charge of

5
internal affairs, they should take complaints. Reports of officer misconduct should be

received by internal affairs staff whenever possible, and by supervisory personnel whenever

possible; in the absence of both, complaints should be handled by any law enforcement

officer. A complaint should never be told to come back at a later date. In order for an inquiry

to be valid and ethical, several conditions must be met. For example, a legitimate complaint

must have been filed or relevant intelligence must have surfaced. The investigator has to have

been given the green light to conduct the inquiry; for instance, the investigation shouldn't

have been started for the investigator's own benefit. (Internal Affairs Policy & Procedures,

2000)

It should go without saying that suspending an officer prior to the conclusion of an inquiry or

the decision of a case is a severe issue. In extreme cases, such as when an officer shows up

for work drunk, immediate suspensions may be required. In some situations, however, a

preliminary inquiry into the subject may show that one of the aforementioned conditions has

been satisfied and a suspension may be implemented at a later date. Regardless, there must be

solid evidence to support a suspension before the matter is resolved. A written explanation of

the suspension's rationale must be given to the person at the time of the suspension.

Utilitarianism Theory
Utilitarians believe that the correct course of action is the one that results in the greatest net

benefit to society as a whole. Further, the appropriate course of action is viewed almost

exclusively in terms of results or consequences, and is therefore a sort of consequentialism.

This moral stance holds that an action's rightness or wrongness may be determined only by

the results it produces. (LawTeacher, 2022)

When deciding what is right and what is wrong, a law enforcement officer should constantly

be thinking about the potential positive and negative outcomes of his or her decision. Because

of this, we recognise that there is a wide variety of opinions on the appropriate punishment

6
for certain offences, some of which may vary significantly from the interpretations of the law

and even from the letter of the law itself. When evaluating a group's opinion of what is

reasonable or ethical, and applying it to the group's relationship with an offender, law

enforcement internal affairs investigators must take into account these varying perspectives.

Analysis of many facets of the utilitarianism theory may help law enforcement professionals

hone their moral judgement. The utilitarian theories popularised by Bentham and Mill are

sometimes referred to as "hedonistic utilitarianism." According to Mill, everyone is searching

for the same thing: happiness. Ultimately, it is human nature to seek out the kinds of pleasure

that make life worth living. As a result, contentment is connected to feeling good and the

absence of negative emotions like pain, whereas unhappiness is associated to negative

emotions like pain that prevent one from enjoying life to its fullest. Understanding how to

effectively comply with prescriptive legislation while striking a balance between that and

what is considered acceptable in terms of cultural norms is the nub of the problem when it

comes to law enforcement accountability. (LawTeacher, 2022)

Determining whether the pleasure of the perpetrator or the victim should be prioritised when

determining whether an action is ethical or immoral is one way in which utilitarianism may

be informative. A comprehensive analysis of the behaviour or conduct is necessary for law

enforcement to determine the best course of action to take. Law enforcement, in the

framework of utilitarianism, must measure the magnitude of the action that results in pleasure

for the largest set of people against the action that results in the greatest good.

References
Internal Affairs Policy & Procedures. (2000, November). From New Jersey Legislature:
https://www.state.nj.us/lps/dcj/agguide/internal.pdf
LawTeacher. (2022, October). Utilitarianism and Deontological Ethics in Law Enforcement.
From LawTeacher:
https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/jurisprudence/utilitarianism-
deontological-ethics-law-enforcement.php

7
Liederbach, J., Boyd, L., Taylor, R., & Kawucha, S. (2007). Is It an Inside Job? An
Examination of Internal Affairs Complaint Investigation Files and the Production of
Nonsustained Findings. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 353-377.
McCartney, S., & Parent, R. (2015). Ethics in Law Enforcement.
Miller, S. (2010). What Makes a Good Internal Affairs Investigation? Criminal Justice
Ethics, 29-40.