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.”
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
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,