Policing the Narrow Ground: Lessons from the Transformation of Policing in Northern Ireland

Citation

Fuller, W.I. (2013), "Policing the Narrow Ground: Lessons from the Transformation of Policing in Northern Ireland", Policing: An International Journal, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 227-230. https://doi.org/10.1108/13639511311302551

This volume chronicles just over ten years of change in policing since the Patten Report was published in 1999 by the Independent Commission of Policing for Northern Ireland. This book is a compilation of essays written by academics, people who were involved in the enactment of the Commission's recommendations, as well as members of the Independent Commission itself. The essays focus on a number of elements, including critically reflecting on the Patten Report, the structure and impetus it has provided in shaping the development of policing in Northern Ireland since the Report's publication, and also discussing the ways that security‐sector reform in Northern Ireland offers important examples and lessons for the wider international community.

Often called “the Patten Commission” for its chairperson Chris Patten, the Independent Commission on Policing for Northern Ireland was formed in 1998 after the “Good Friday” Agreement. There isn’t room here to discuss the depth and breadth of the 1998 Agreement, but to give a very brief overview, the Agreement established that both legislative and executive authority over “most issues was to be devolved from London to a locally elected Assembly and Executive in Northern Ireland” (p. 2). Further, members of the Assembly were determined by a proportionally representative electoral system and “ministerial offices in the power‐sharing Executive were allocated between the political parties on the basis of their popular support” (p. 2). The 1998 Agreement also instituted a North South Ministerial Council and many “cross‐border executive agencies” that were charged with generating policies on “issues of mutual advantage, by agreement on both sides of the border” (p. 2). There were also new measures implemented for co‐operation between the British and Irish governments including an advisory Council which also worked with the other devolved governments of the UK (e.g. Wales and Scotland). Further, there were social changes instituted such as “measures on the release of prisoners, demilitarisation [sic] of society, new equality procedures, recognition of the Irish language, reform of the criminal justice system and a commission to examine the question of policing” (p. 3).

Thus the Patten Commission came into being through an effort towards giving the negotiators of the 1998 Agreement a chance at brokering peace in the North of Ireland without having officially solidified an approach to policing specifically. Therefore, the Commission was born out of a serious need for negotiating post‐conflict policing amidst deep political, social and cultural schisms. Because of the level of political and social tension, it was agreed that the Patten Commission should be an “independent” one and that it should be “‘broadly representative’ and have ‘expert and international representation’ to make recommendations on policing” (p. 3). Essentially, the Commission was asked to completely overhaul policing in Northern Ireland so that a new, post‐peace agreement security‐sector could be established and that this new police service would be just that, a service, and therefore understood as an important, valued and contingent element of the social and political fiber of the community. The task before the Commission was considerable, as it included not just engineering the structure and processes of a policing system in and of itself, but it was also charged with devising and implementing a cultural strategy geared toward creating a positive identity for the police service, effective roles for policing and an amenable social rapport with a more than fractious public.

These were lofty goals in general, but especially so considering the times. They were also ones which were inherently based upon the social understanding of and relationship to policing in Northern Ireland. Thus the central thrust of the Patten Commission was not simply to design a structural approach to policing, but rather to navigate the delicate, socio‐cultural nuances surrounding the relationship between the security sector and the population it was to be embedded within, work for and with, all in a post‐conflict area. It is the unique focus upon these particular processes which makes this book valuable. The level of attention it gives to the social impact that the reforms of the Patten Report were geared toward highlights that while the reforms were governing‐level initiatives, they were deeply culturally sensitive ones. Indeed, while at face value they appear as a structural reshaping of the policing landscape, in practice they were designed to retool the cultural milieu, a task considerably more mercurial. This is where the volume helps to illuminate the contribution to the international policing and security‐sector community that this example affords.

The essays in this book center around the work that the Patten Commission has done, attending to elements like human rights, managing difficulties that have come up along the way as reforms have been implemented, and fostering support across both Nationalist and Loyalist communities for policing and police processes. The work is organized into three main sections. The first section, consisting of six chapters, is written by individuals who were members of the Patten Commission itself. It offers these members’ unique viewpoints on the genesis of various elements of the Report, ways in which the Report operated, and the influence that it eventually had. Opening this section is a chapter by Chris Patten himself, the former chairperson of the Commission, in which he artfully discusses the work that he and his fellow members were engaged in. He also expounds upon the “challenge for the civil service, and indeed the then British Secretary of State” (pp. 7, 14‐6) as the prospect of their loss of control over policing became more of a reality. In addition to this, Patten explores the perennial question of the “public accountability of policing” (pp. 7, 19‐25). Prominent academic criminologist Professor Clifford Shearing follows this with an investigation of how the initial reaction to the Report's recommendations was one of substantial debate and which is today one of retrospective praise on the whole. Shearing attends to the role that the “design principles” (p. 7) or “themes” (pp. 29‐35) of the report played in essentially providing basic scaffolding to the recommendations. Coupled with these, the way in which the Commission consistently articulated itself as concerned with policing as a process and not just a commission on the police, played an integral role in its effectiveness (pp. 33‐5).

Gerald Lynch, an international expert on criminal justice education, follows this line of thought by delving into the linkages between human rights and policing and discusses at length the issue of police accountability. He also begs the question of “quis custodiet ipsos custodes” or “who will guard the guards?” Lynch focusses on these elements through the lens of education. He highlights the much‐overlooked importance of police training, and suggests the idea of police training being moved into mainstream higher education contexts if no new police college in the north is going to be built. This is particularly noteworthy because despite Recommendation 131 of the Report being that a Police College must be built, to date this has not occurred (pp. 43‐6). Next, Kathleen O’Toole draws on her expertise as a high‐level US police officer in her chapter to examine police management issues as well as those of community policing. She highlights the key role that management plays in reform and indeed, in developing positive rapport with the community, a key goal of the Report (pp. 53‐7). Continuing the thread of building community support for policing, Maurice Hayes, formerly a high‐level civil servant in the north, follows up with an address of how to foster just such support. He also articulates the issue of how exactly to “monitor and oversee the implementation” of the Report's recommendations (p. 8) with careful attention to the work still needing to be done (pp. 65‐7). He notes most prominently the issue of fostering “community policing” and the fact that as the devolution of budgets is yet to be accomplished, the Report's vision of de‐centralized control has not been realized (pp. 66‐7). He summates with the suggestion that it is only the “performance of the police themselves and the judgement [sic] of society” which will prove to be the “test of acceptability” (p. 67).

To close this section, former Ulster Unionist Party member and current senior barrister, Peter Smith discusses the Party's reaction to the Commission itself as well as to the Report, focussing in particular on the then‐Party leader David Trimble. Despite having endorsed its creation, Trimble initially labeled the Patten Report as “flawed and shoddy” (p. 71) despite the unwillingness of senior Ulster Unionist politicians (such as Trimble) to meaningfully engage with the Commission and its task. Smith's chapter deals mostly with the intricacies of the then‐political situation in Northern Ireland which is of most use to specialists in this area. However, for the more general reader, his section notes the important role that political agendas have to play in supporting and legitimating policing reform/structures. The key point here is in Smith's reminder to give adequate attention to the political climate and machinations of parties and leaders while remaining mindful of what the “big picture” is and the ways that these same parties and leaders may be working toward them from different angles.

The second section, made up of five chapters, is authored by individuals who were involved in putting the reforms the Pattern Report proposed into practice and also by those who oversaw the implementation of the reforms. It explores issues of accountability and integrity further by discussing elements such as the nature of the first Oversight Commission through its role in evaluating the way the Report was implemented, the subject of Tom Constantine's chapter (pp. 88‐96). It also delves into challenges the leadership of an organization (and indeed structure) in transition faces, especially with respect to accountability on such elements as intelligence and the relationship with the community, the focus of Sir Hugh Orde's chapter. This section also attends to the upper‐level management of policing in the north through Baroness Nuala O’Loan's commentary on the establishment and role of the Police Ombudsman of Northern Ireland, of which she was the first, holding the office for some seven years. This is the independent office charged with investigating complaints against the police made by average people as well as police themselves. O’Loan details the trials of building the office's working relationship with the people and police of Northern Ireland (pp. 115‐19) and also notes some of the more high‐profile cases her office investigated during her tenure (pp. 119‐25).

Professor Desmond Rea (first chairperson of the Northern Ireland Police Board), Denis Bradley (vice‐chair) and Barry Gilligan (vice‐chair) contribute to the discussion by expounding upon the role of the Northern Ireland Police Board in “providing a framework for public accountability” and detailing the ways that the Board interacted with other elements of policing (pp. 8, 130‐40). They note in particular that while policing plays a key role in creating a healthy social fabric, it is not a cure‐all for deeper ills and as such, the monumental change that the police service in Northern Ireland had to undergo (and continues to undergo) while situated within a contentious social climate, provides some outstanding examples to the international community. Lastly in this section, Maggie Beirne and Martin O’Brien highlight human‐rights NGOs’ standpoints during the conflict in Northern Ireland at the time when the Commission was undertaking its work. Both authors worked for the Committee on Administration of Justice, the foremost civil‐society organization in this area for Northern Ireland (p. 8), and their contribution to this volume focusses on NGOs’ perspectives on the Report, on how it was implemented and the changes that NGOs perceived during and after this time (pp. 151‐60).

Finally, the third section, which includes four chapters, is contributed by academics that reflect on the Commission, its influences and situate it within an international context. Senior Lecturer John Doyle examines the political elements of reforming policing (pp. 167‐9) with special attention to the standpoints of local political parties (pp. 169‐85), the deep schisms during the conflict and the ways in which these elements changed after the Commission carried out its work (pp. 189‐200). Barrister and Senior Lecturer Mary O’Rawe notes the key role that gender must play when examining the metamorphoses of policing that the north of Ireland has undertaken. She sets the case of Northern Ireland within the international context (pp. 213‐16) and dissects why “gender mainstreaming and the equal participation of women” (pp. 216‐28), while so important, are so difficult in actuality (pp. 9, 228‐33). Senior Lecturer Graham Ellison turns our attention to the relationships between police and community in the “post‐Patten” period (p. 9). Drawing on community attitude surveys and his own research in working class communities in Northern Ireland, Ellison shines light on the challenges that still remain for policing and community relations (pp. 9, 247‐51, 255‐69). To close this volume, the Head of the International Security Sector Advisory Team at the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, Mark Downes, situates that Patten Commission's work and the conditions in Northern Ireland within the wider international context of “security sector reform in post‐conflict countries” (p. 9). In particular, Downes notes the way that the forms in Northern Ireland serve as good examples for stabilizing post‐conflict areas and for building reform processes which can be followed elsewhere throughout the globe.

Ultimately, this collection of essays attends carefully to the impact the Patten initiatives have had on the social and cultural understanding of and relationship with policing in Northern Ireland. The systemic change that these structural‐level reforms were geared towards remains at the forefront of the analyses articulated here. Essentially, it is this aspect which specifically makes the book more than just an exegesis on the efficacy or failings of bureaucratic, security‐sector adjustments in locations that have experienced conflict. This volume attends to the multifaceted ways that policing, in and of itself, is inherently a socially mediated, mitigated and relational task and that it has an integral role to play in the well‐being, and indeed condition, of the wider community. I would recommend this volume to those interested in policing, reform, structural reorganization in post‐conflict regions, and the politics of policing.