A Comparison of International Police Policies

This analysis explores the different types of tactics used by the police and Judicial systems in various countries of the world. This paper is designed to examine and compare the police systems and governmental characteristics of the Canada, Mexico, and England.

Each of these countries will be directly compared with that of the united States and Its Judicial systems. The central Issue throughout the analysis will be how to balance the power within the judicial system as well as that of law enforcement. This analysis explores the development in the law of enforcement reoccurred In England, Canada, Mexico, and the United States.Statement of the Problem The propensity of criminals to cross national borders–to engage in “transnational crime”– is certainly not a new phenomenon; it is probably as old as the borders themselves. Borders were established to delineate the Jurisdiction claimed by each state, and crossing national borders has often provided criminals with a way to mitigate or avoid the consequences of illegal acts.

Yet in spite of a long, eventful history, there is strong evidence that transnational crime has become more prevalent and serious today than ever before. IntroductionWe live In a different world from that of our parents and grandparents, and many of the differences facilitate greater transnational crime.

Consider, for example, the following five developments, all within the last twenty-five years: (1) Transportation systems have improved and expanded dramatically, particularly airline and automobile travel; International tourism and business travel are at record levels. (2) Communication systems have improved and expanded most notably satellite and fiber optic telephone and television transmission, FAX transmission, and computer Information storage, processing, and transmission. ) The breakup of the Soviet union has reduced or eliminated many trade and travel restrictions between East and West, reduced the level of social control within and between many of the former Soviet Block countries, and made obsolete many countries’ Cold War fears and policies. (4) World trade has expanded, including stronger participation by the economies of Eastern Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and the “Third World”; world economic interdependence is now a basic fact of life. 5) Perhaps most significant of all, the world’s population has increased, resulting in more crowding, more areas of poverty, disease, and hunger, and large movements of people across national borders. The cumulative effect of these conditions is more people, more opportunities and possibly reasons for committing crime, and more effective movement of people and information across national borders–a perfect setup for increased transnational crime.It is no wonder that our newspapers now regularly report Incidences of International terrorism, theft, smuggling, securities and currency violations, computer crimes, fleeing from Justice, drug trafficking, and Illegal immigration-?just to name a few.

Background Police are government officers who enforce the law and maintain order regardless of ‘OFF people of a community. There are many ways policemen and policewomen serve their communities. They patrol streets to guard against crime and to Help people with various problems.The police are often called to settle quarrels, find lost people, and aid accident victims. During floods, fires, and other disasters, they help provide shelter, transportation, and protection for victims. The police form part of a nation’s criminal Justice system, which also includes courts and prisons. Police officers enforce criminal law, which covers murder, robbery, burglary, and other crimes that threaten society.

They investigate such crimes and arrest suspected lawbreakers, using whatever they need to get the Job done.They also testify in court trials. Every nation in the world has a police system. This paper is designed to examine and compare the police systems and governmental characteristics of the Canada, Mexico, and France. Each of these countries will be directly compared with that of the United States and its Judicial systems. A distinguishing feature of modern violation is the use of governmental institutions– police, courts, and correctional agencies –to intervene on society’s behalf to resolve conflicts and enforce basic social rules.Such “state” Justice, properly administered, is deemed superior to the earlier private “Justice” that featured physical, often brutal and unrestrained, conflict between individuals, families, or tribes.

A primary goal of state Justice is to control social violence and destruction, and to protect the weak from factorization; however, if governments today, primarily through their police agencies, and to effectively rotted citizens from crime and enforce society’s rules, they must increasingly be able to deal with crime that is transnational in nature.A second primary goal of state justice, salient to this paper, is the serving of each society’s own dominant values and customs in the administration of “Justice”. Hence, each society has its own enforcement style and priorities, and even some of its own laws–factors that complicate and occasionally frustrate attempts at international police cooperation. Each of the four countries discussed as the central theme of protecting and serving the people of their communities and countries.Comparative Analysis In Canada, there are three levels of police forces: municipal, provincial, and federal. Just as with the United States, Mexico and Europe; Canadian law enforcement is constitutionally a provincial responsibility, although most urban areas have been given the authority by the provinces to maintain their own police forces. Small municipalities contract out their law enforcement to the provincial authorities and all but three provinces in turn contract out their provincial law enforcement responsibilities to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the federal police force.

Newfoundland is one of the provinces with its own provincial police force but that force is only responsible for the larger urban areas. The province has contracted the RACE to patrol the rest of the province. The RACE, colloquially known as Mounties, is the only police force to service all three levels. Ontario, Quebec and Newfoundland maintain their own provincial police forces: The Ontario Provincial Police, S;ret du Quobeck (Quebec Provincial Police) and Royal Newfoundland Constabulary (World Book 2006).Smaller Canadian cities often contract police service from the provincial logging authority, while larger cities maintain their own force. There are also a few Canadian National and Canadian Pacific railways both have their own police forces. Their duties are to prevent crimes against the railways, protection of transiting goods, materials and public rail transit being moved on their rail systems.

(World Book 2006) They work to protect the public, rail personnel, and property that is owned or administered by the railways.As of May 2006, Canada had 62,500 police officers, or 192 per 100,000 people (World Book 2006). Canadian police strength reached a peak n 1975, when there were 206 officers per 100,000 people. Although the current number reflects a significant rise in the total police strength in the country (the highest in 12 years after steady declines in the sass and sass), Canada still lags behind the United States (230 per 100,000) (World Book 2006).The organization of Canada’s Judicial system is a function of Canada’s Constitution, and particularly of the Constitution Act, 1867. By virtue of that Act, authority for the Judicial system in Canada is divided between the federal government and the ten provincial governments. The latter are given Jurisdiction over “the administration of Justice” in the provinces, which includes “the constitution, organization and maintenance” of the courts, both civil and criminal, in the province, as well as civil procedure in those courts.

However, this Jurisdiction does not extend to the appointment of the Judges of all of these courts (World Book 2006). The power to appoint the Judges of the superior courts in the provinces – which includes the provincial courts of appeal as well as the trial courts of general Jurisdiction – is given to the federal government, as s the obligation to provide for the remuneration of those Judges and the authority to remove them. This latter authority is a limited one and, in fact, has never been exercised.The federal government is also given the authority to establish “a General Court of Appeal for Canada and any Additional Courts for the better Administration of the Laws of Canada”. (World Book 2006) It has used this authority to create the Supreme Court of Canada as well as the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court and the Tax Court of Canada. The federal government also has, as part of its restriction over criminal law, exclusive authority over the procedure in courts of criminal Jurisdiction.What emerges from these allocations of Jurisdiction in the Constitution is a court system in which provincial governments have Jurisdiction over both the constitution, organization and maintenance of, and the appointment of judges to, the lowest level of courts (generally known simply as “provincial courts”), while the federal government has authority over the constitution, organization and maintenance of, and the appointment of Judges to, the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court and the Tax Court of Canada.

Authority over the superior courts in each province is shared between the provincial and federal governments; the provinces have Jurisdiction over the constitution, organization and maintenance of these courts, while the federal government has authority to appoint the Judges. The fact that Jurisdiction over these courts is divided in this way means that, in order for these courts to function properly, the federal and provincial governments are required to cooperate in the exercise of their respective authorities.The courts in Canada are organized in a four-tiered structure. The Supreme Court of Canada sits at the apex of the structure and, consistent with its role as “a General Court of Appeal for Canada”, hears appeals from both the federal systems, headed in each province by that province’s Court of Appeal. In contrast to its counterpart in the United States, therefore, the Supreme Court of Canada functions as a national, and not merely federal, court of last resort (Wisped 2007).The next tier down from the Supreme Court of Canada consists of the Federal Court of Appeal ND the various provincial courts of appeal. Two of these latter courts, it should be noted, also function as the courts of appeal for the three federal territories in northern Canada, the Yukon Territory, the Northwest Territories, and the Unapt Territory.

The next tier down consists of the Federal Court, the Tax Court of Canada and the provincial and territorial superior courts of general Jurisdiction.These latter courts can fairly be described as the linchpin of the Canadian Judicial system since, reflecting the role of their English counterparts, on which they were modeled; they re the only courts in the system with inherent Jurisdiction in addition to Jurisdiction granted by federal and provincial statutes. At the bottom of the hierarchy are the courts typically described as provincial courts.These courts are generally divided within each province into various divisions defined by the subject matter of their respective Jurisdictions; hence, one usually finds a Traffic Division, a Small Claims Division, a Family Division, a Criminal Division, and so on. The Canadian Court System and the U. S Court System are almost identical in structure. Each has the Supreme Court as its highest court and all others fall Just below it.

The Canadians approach to sentencing could be used in any of the countries discussed in this analytical review (Wisped 2007) It is revered as being extremely fair and effective.The system has been praised for being highly effective in meeting the needs of the public for a safe and Just society. Canada’s approach to sentencing and corrections emphasizes fairness, effective protection of public safety, flexible and individualized approaches to sentencing and policy decision-making based on evidence of what works to reduce crime. The sentencing decision is one of the most complex decisions that a court is required to make.Canada’s system recognizes that offences are committed by a wide variety of persons in widely varying circumstances, and therefore Judges are given the discretion to determine individualized sentences. Of the remaining countries left to be discussed it is the general consensus of most that the Mexican police and Judicial system would be the most corrupt and unrecognized in comparison with the United States or any country for that matter. As a large federation of 31 states and one federal district, Mexico maintains a complex rarity of police forces with different functions and Jurisdictions.

Bottle & Riviera). Though estimates vary due to inadequate centralized data collection and changing conditions, it is safe to say there are more than 350,000 police officers in the country and about 3,000 different forces at municipal, state and federal levels. Besides the multiplicity of forces in Mexico, the other outstanding features of country’s police are their corruption, growing implementation, poor preparation and ineffectiveness in the face of increasingly severe crime. (Graham& Dubitable).Some causes and attempted redresses for these problems are explored, following functional and Jurisdictional descriptions of the police below. There is no predominant police force that represents Mexico policing in a definitive way. However, recent reforms in three of the most significant police bodies demonstrate the kaleidoscopic picture of Mexican Rep;biblical 0 PEG, recently established a new police force, the Federal Agency of Investigation which replaced the notoriously corrupt Federal Judicial police by the presidential decree of Vaccine Fox (2000-2006) on November 1, 2001.

The efforts to evolve into a professional, uncorrupted force for the investigation of federal crimes are ongoing. (Graham& Dubitable). Secondly, the Federal Preventive police (Political Federal Preventive 0 PEP) was created in 1999 by the initiative of President Ernest Cedilla (1994-2000) to prevent and combat crime throughout the country. The APP has been assuming its authority in stages over time, as its budget has grown and it has combined and reorganized police departments from major agencies such as those for migration, treasury, and highways.Thirdly, the Secretariat of Public Security of the Federal District (Secretariat De Surprised P;biblical del District Federal 0 SSP), unlike the previous two, does not have national reach, but it does manage a combined force of over 90,000 officers in the Federal District (DE). The SSP is charged with maintaining public order and safety in the center of Mexico City where public insecurity and crime rates are highest in the nation. As a result, there have been concurrent efforts to increase accountability and improve police effectiveness.

Beginning in 1996, authorities began a dramatic restructuring of the SSP, which included replacing major officials with army officers. Recently, the most recent high-profile effort has been Mayor Andrea Lopez Border’s announcement in 2002 that the UDF would contract former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani as a consultant to the SSP. (Graham& Dubitable). The Mexican police officers and state officials have been diligently working to clean of the streets of Mexico. The Mexican Judicial makeup is similar to that of the United States and Canada.There are four types of Jurisdictions that affect the nature, activity and organization of police institutions: the three levels of spectrophotometers, state, and municipals the federal district. The municipal represents the local level of government and may contain many smaller towns and cities.

Like counties in the U. S. That have sheriffs, they can maintain a police force. (Graham& Dubitable). Municipals only have preventive police, but not all do. There are 2,395 municipal; 335 have no police forces.There are 2,000 municipal with fewer than 100 officers, which imply that the police departments are not very developed and probably not very modernized.

However, 87 of the largest municipal account for 68. 7% of preventive police at all levels of government, so some are quite complex. The Federal District contains the heart of Mexico City and the seat of federal government. There are 8. 7 million residents of the UDF, according to 2002 estimates, and another 18 million people in the metropolitan region.The federal police are notable for their focus on illegal drugs and other types of organized crime. (Bottle & Riviera) The Peg’s Special Anti-organized Crime Unit (Undead Especial contra la Delinquency Organized – DUDE) appeared as a response to organized crime, which was first defined in Mexico legal code in February 1994 as “three or more persons organized under rules of discipline and hierarchy in order to commit, in a violent and repeated way or with the purpose of profit, any of the crimes legally defined.

The Federal Law against Organized Crime (Lee Federal contra la Delinquencies Organized 0 Aloof) was passed in November 1996 to deal with the problem of drug trafficking, though other crimes, such as migrant smuggling, trafficking in arms or infants, and policing policies seem to be the most unique of the other countries discussed. It is by far the most corrupt and unrecognized and is the least like that of the UnitedStates. Of the countries previously discussed the United Kingdom and the United States have the closest working relationship. The United Kingdom has been an ally to the United States for years with domestic and foreign issues (Villa). They also share a great deal of similarities in their policing policies and their Judicial structure although there are some differences.The United Kingdom (I-J) does not have one single police service serving the general public; with the exception of various special police forces and of Northern Ireland (which has one unified force, the Police Service f Northern Ireland (SIN)), police forces are arranged in geographical areas matched to the boundaries of one or more local authorities; in recent years being increasingly described as “territorial police forces”. In turn, these forces are regulated by the laws of the appropriate country within the UK (administration of police matters is not generally affected by the Government of Wales Act 2006), I.

. , Scotland, Northern Ireland, England and Wales. It is common for the territorial police forces in England and Wales to be referred to as “Home Office” police forces, after the government apartment which exercises control at a national level in England and Wales but this is erroneous as the description can encompass a number of miscellaneous forces subject to some kind of control by the Home Office but which are not the concern of the various Police Acts which control territorial police forces (Dimensions).A constable’s powers can be exercised throughout the Jurisdiction within which he has taken oath and in others within legally-defined circumstances. In general terms there are three Jurisdictions in the United Kingdom for police officers of the territorial forces. These being England & Wales, Scotland and finally Northern Ireland. A police officer of one the three mentioned Jurisdictions have all the powers of a constable throughout his own Jurisdiction and limited powers in the other two Jurisdictions.

All police officers are “constables” in law, irrespective of rank.Police officers of one of the specialized police services such as the British Transport Police or Ministry of Defense Police have more restricted Jurisdiction. See List of police forces in the United Kingdom for a fuller explanation of Jurisdictions (Villa). The smallest territorial Alice force in the UK is the City of London Police, which polices the square mile of the ancient administrative area of the City of London. It is the single exception to the general grouping of I-J police forces into areas of at least “county” size.The majority of London is policed by the Metropolitan Police, which is also the largest police service in the country, by a large margin, in terms of organizational size. Certain departments of the Metropolitan Police operate extra-territorially to varying extents, including the Anti-Terrorist Branch, Royalty and Diplomatic Protection Department, ND certain units of the Special Branch.

The new Serious Organized Crime Agency is also a national agency that works in all police areas.There are 52 territorial police forces in the United Kingdom (Robinson). A number of other police forces exist which were not formed under general national legislation and are not responsible for general public policing. These have previously been referred to as “special police forces”, but that designation has now been given the special meaning of describing the British Transport Police (BAT), the Civil Nuclear Constabulary (CNN), the Ministry emit being associated with particular activities which cross national and/or local boundaries (Dimensions).The miscellaneous police forces which are neither territorial police forces nor (by the new definition) special police forces include various bodies (not all uniformed) such as those responsible for some local authority- owned public parks; the smallest force is possibly the York Minster Police, however these very small police forces provide no genuine police services and tend to rely on the local territorial force. The United Kingdom does not have a written constitution. The equivalent body of away is based on statute, common law, and “traditional rights.

Changes may come about formally through new acts of Parliament, informally through the acceptance of new practices and usage, or by Judicial precedents (Villa). Although Parliament has the theoretical power to make or repeal any law, in actual practice the weight of 700 years of tradition restrains arbitrary actions (Robinson). Executive power rests nominally with the monarch but actually is exercised by a committee of ministers (cabinet) traditionally selected from among the members of the House of Commons and, to a lesser extent, the House of Lords.The prime minister is normally the leader of the largest party in the Commons, and the government is dependent on its support. Parliament represents the entire country and can legislate for the whole or for any constituent part or combination of parts. The maximum parliamentary term is 5 years, but the prime minister may ask the monarch to dissolve Parliament and call a general election at any time. The focus of legislative power is the 659-member House of Commons, which has sole Jurisdiction over finance.

The House of Lords, although shorn of most of its powers, can still review, amend, or delay temporarily NY bills except those relating to the budget (Dimensions). The House of Lords has more time than the House of Commons to pursue one of its more important functions–debating public issues. In 1999, the government removed the automatic right of hereditary peers to hold seats in the House of Lords. The current house consists of appointed life peers who hold their seats for life and 92 hereditary peers who will hold their seats only until final reforms have been agreed upon and implemented (Robinson).The Judiciary is independent of the legislative and executive branches but cannot review the constitutionality of legislation. After extensive research of each of the countries discussed in the comparative analysis textbooks and scholars have identified three universal primary police agency functions: ;Order maintenance. This is the broad mandate to keep the peace or otherwise prevent behaviors which might disturb others.

This can deal with things ranging from a barking dog to a fist-fight.By way of description, Cole and Smith note that police are usually called-on to “handle” these situations with discretion, rather than deal with them as strict violations of law, though of course their authority to deal with these situations are based in violations of law. Law enforcement. Those powers are typically used only in cases where the law has been violated and a suspect must be identified and apprehended. Most obvious instances include robbery, murder, or burglary. This is the popular notion of the main police function, but the frequency of such activity is dependent on geography and season. Service.

Services may include rendering first aid, providing tourist information, guiding the Smith cited one study which showed 80% of all calls for police Helpance did not involve crimes, but this may not be the case in all parts of the country. Because police agencies are traditionally available year-round, 24 hours a day, citizens call upon police departments not only in times of trouble, but also when Just inconvenienced. As a result, police services may include roadside auto Helpance, providing referrals to other agencies, finding lost pets or property, or checking locks on vacationers’ homes.These countries also share the fundamental purposes of sentencing and they are to contribute, along with crime prevention initiatives, to respect for the law and the maintenance of a Just, peaceful and safe society by imposing sanctions that eave one or more of the following objectives: ; to denounce unlawful conduct; the deter the offender and other persons from committing offences; to separate offenders from society, where necessary; to Help in rehabilitating offenders; to provide reparations for harm done to victims or the community; and, ; to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders, and acknowledgement of the harm done to victims and the community. Each of theses objectives is imperative to effective policing any society whether it’s local or international.Regardless of town, state, or country each societies mission is the same and that is to provide an exemplary level of service and protection to the residents and businesses of the city, town & or country and to all those who may visit, work in, or travel through any of the communities discussed. Every police officer vows serve his or her community through professional conduct at all times with the enforcement of criminal and traffic laws without prejudice or bias, with respect for the rights of all people, to assure a safe and secure environment for all.

Each of the countries discussed has areas that they can improve upon and areas in which they are renowned for.