James Hart: Zero tolerance policing would destroy public support
From the City Insights Lecture, given at the City University, by the Commissioner of Police for the City of London
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.It is simply not realistic to prosecute every offence reported, or indeed is it desirable. Yet we are regularly encouraged by some opinion-formers to implement so-called "zero tolerance" policing. This stems from the belief and some fairly limited research, that if minor offences are robustly tackled and prosecuted, then individuals would be less inclined to commit other, possibly more serious offences.
It is simply not realistic to prosecute every offence reported, or indeed is it desirable. Yet we are regularly encouraged by some opinion-formers to implement so-called "zero tolerance" policing. This stems from the belief and some fairly limited research, that if minor offences are robustly tackled and prosecuted, then individuals would be less inclined to commit other, possibly more serious offences.
As I said a few moments ago, the fact that the law gives powers to police in various circumstances, does not in itself imply a duty to use them on every occasion and at all times. It seems to me that the first likely affect of an overall "zero tolerance" policy would be that normally law abiding people would be swept up in a wave of prosecutions for minor offences, the outcome of which I would predict would be a rapid falling away of confidence in the status of the law, followed by a corresponding lack of support for police, possibly when it was most needed.
The proliferation of minor prosecutions would be followed by the inability of police resources to keep up with operational demands, most probably when the next major incident arose and officers had to be re-directed to tackle more pressing issues. The deserved discredit that would undoubtedly follow, would jeopardise the credibility of police tactics in the future.
This may sound a little harsh on an idea that has much popular appeal in some quarters, but I would argue that long term public support, brought about by more thoughtful tactics, is preferable to the unsustainable, short-term reduction in headline statistics.
So, the ethical and tolerant officer who understands the concept "policing by consent" and who exercises discretion, is my preferred model officer.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments