Deliberative Accountability? Enlighten… Deliberative Accountability? SIPR International Policing Conference 10th November 2016 Ali Malik University of Edinburgh @UoELawSchool @MalikUoE

Purpose of Accountability Proactive scrutiny of policing policy (particularly where policies are legal, but contentious, e.g. stop and search), and Induce learning and development In order to ensure Policing policies are Responsive Responsiveness incorporates “many conceived indicators of democratic policing” (Aitchison and Blaustein, 2013: 498)

Underlying Problems of Police Accountability Operational Independence (Lustgarten, 1986; Walker, 2000;), Police professionalism (Jones, 2008), police as experts and “knowledge brokers” (Ericson 1994: 151) Conversely… Lack of expertise, skills and capacities of traditional forums of accountability (particularly the local police boards see for e.g. Laing and Fossey, 2011)

“Structural Disconnects” - (Henry, Malik and Aitchison, 2016) Between ‘local’ and ‘national’ Armed Policing Withdrawal of traffic warden support Closure of front counter provision

Deliberation at the national level Reasoning and Justification Accountability is a “dialectical activity, requiring officials to answer, explain and justify” (Mulgan, 2000: 569) Exchange of knowledge and information Deliberation between many experts across institutional boundaries would ensure that best decisions are achieved (Forcehimes 2010: 75)

Deliberation at the local level Traditional forms of ‘consultation’ limit participation, reinforce apathy, lack impact on decision making and outcomes (Escobar, 2014: 26) ‘Mini-publics’ more conducive to informing local decision making (Escobar, 2014; Lafont, 2015)

References Aitchison, A. and Blaustein, J. (2013). Policing for Democracy or Democratically Responsive Policing. European Journal of Criminology, 10(4), 496-511. Dryzek, J. (2000). Deliberative Democracy And Beyond Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ericson, R. (1994). 'The division of expert knowledge in policing and security', British Journal of Sociology, 45(2), 149-175. Escobar, O. (2014) Towards participatory democracy in Scotland, in POST (ed.), Scotland 44: Ideas for a new nation, Edinburgh: POST Forcehimes, A. (2010). Deliberative Democracy with a Spine: Epistemic Agency as Political Authority. Dialogue, 52(2-3), 69-78. Henry, A., Malik, A., and Aitchison, A. (2016). Partners in Scrutiny: Local Police Scrutiny Arrangements in Scotland Final Project Report. Available at http://www.sipr.ac.uk/downloads/parters_in_scrutiny_final_110416.pdf Jones, T. (2008). The accountability of policing. In: T. Newburn, ed. Handbook of Policing. Cullompton: Willan. Jones, T., Newburn, T. and Smith, D. (1996). Policing and the idea of democracy. British Journal of Criminology, 36(2), 182-198. Kuper, A. (2004). Democracy Beyond Borders: Justice and Representation in Global Institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press Lafont, C. (2015). Deliberation, Participation, and Democratic Legitimacy: Should Deliberative Mini-publics Shape Public Policy? The Journal of Political Philosophy, 23(1), pp. 40-63. Laing, A. and Fossey, E. (2011). Governance and accountability of policing in Scotland: a discussion paper by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary. HMIC. Lustgarten, L. (1986). The Governance of Police. London: Sweet and Maxwell. Walker, N. (2000). Policing in a Changing Constitutional Order. London: Sweet and Maxwell.