Strategy realization of Zero tolerance - the main task of municipal police


To pass to contents

in this article we will consider the basic principles of this strategy and also we will sort an indicative example of its practical application and results achieved at the same time

article was for the first time published
on February 23, 2018 on Yandex channel. Zen


Strategy realization of «Zero tolerance» - the main task of municipal police

Often it is necessary to hear a phrase: «With laws we are fine, at us with legality badly». And whether there can be a legality selective, dividing offenses into considerable, insignificant and insignificant? No, cannot.
First of all, because such selectivity contradicts the concept of legality: this exact and strict respect for precepts of law, strict and full implementation of instructions of laws and the legal acts based on them all legal entities. For derogation from requirements of precepts of law there comes legal responsibility. Notice - all norms, without exception.
Respectively, everything that is beyond this concept, legality cannot be called any more. Yes, offenses can differ on the level of public danger, that is constitute essential danger or not really essential. But despite any level of public danger, they do not stop being offenses. In practice the relevancy of offense is considered when determining extent of punishment for their commission, however punishment for this offense has to be inevitable.
The legality and inevitability of punishment are basic principles on which the strategy of «Zero tolerance» is based (in some literature the term «Zero Tolerance» is used).
Hundreds of criminologists of the whole world carried out tens of thousands of scientific research and is written as much works on this subject. And all of them meet in one: the bulk of the criminals who committed heavy and especially serious crimes began the criminal activity with small offenses for which commission they did not bear any responsibility. And further the feeling of impunity pushed them on new and new violations of the law. Therefore the legality is a strategy basis of «Zero tolerance».
Realization of this strategy is a task of all law enforcement agencies of our country. This postulate is enshrined in the legislation regulating their activity. In the theory everything is clear and clear: there are tasks established by the law, there are executive authorities which are obliged this task to carry out. But how the situation with realization of this strategy in practice is?
Let's not stir figure of police statistics which to put it mildly, are very far from reality. In general if all reporting which is annually published by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation was reliable, then crime as the social phenomenon in our country had to disappear completely about 10 years ago. It is rather simple to look around, to remember that we see almost daily on the way home. And we can see the following: drinking of alcohol and smoking at playgrounds, as well as in other places where it is forbidden, expression by rough strong language in the presence of strangers, including children, street vandalism, the music shouting from cars at night, concourses of teenagers at entrances, on nurseries and sports grounds after which they remind garbage dumps. And the graffiti of a wall, a stop of public transport stuck with advertizing and painted (today the considerable share of such inscriptions is advertizing of drugs), garbage on roads and sidewalks, even where there are ballot boxes, the broken trees in parks and squares standing on car lawns.
It is possible to list similar pictures for a long time from our ordinary life which already became a habitual part of a city landscape and most of inhabitants began to perceive it as though an unpleasant, but natural part of everyday life.
Though indirectly, but on the fact that the problem is aggravated and requires the solution specifies also a large number of the social movements which appeared in recent years like «Lion against», «The sober yards» or «Stopkham». It is possible to argue long on that well it or it is bad, but the fact remains if citizens begin to unite and carry out those tasks which are assigned by the law to police, then these are extremely negative signals. These signals directly specify, on the fact that problems against which citizens unite exist and they are relevant, but the most tragic, that in counteraction to these phenomena people count on themselves more, than on law enforcement agencies.
But the majority already just reconciled to the fact that around them are constantly made let and small, but offenses, and ceased to notice them. Why does that happen?
Today territorial authorities of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, but apparently are obliged to fight against these negative phenomena while it turns out, to put it mildly - it is not really effective.
Also here not police officers who have to be engaged (with emphasis on a phrase – «including») and small offenses are guilty, to reveal, stop and make responsible persons them made. A problem in the organization of activity of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, and it is concrete in reporting system. This system is constructed on division of offenses into two main categories (upon them much more), these are «Reporting» and «Other».
Reporting are those offenses in a section of articles of the Criminal Code and the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences on which to division the concrete, quantitative plan for year or other reporting period is established to identification and suppression. All efforts of divisions of police, with a priority on a word – quantity will also be bent on performance of quantitative indices by these types of offenses. All other offenses which were not included into the list «Reporting» belong to the category «Other» work on them will be conducted by the residual principle, that is practically in any way. And on «Reporting» violations the considerable share of indicators will be created not due to active work of police, and due to manipulations with statistics and the reporting.
Such model of the organization of service in the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation together with last «reforms», led to what else to the functioned staff of external services just began to be engaged in «other small things» once.
Thus to be engaged in strategy realization of «Zero tolerance» the staff of territorial divisions of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, maybe want, but cannot. The system existing in police not for people, and for statistics prevents – to work. In addition, in the Ministry of Internal Affairs do not like to be engaged in strategy for a long time, it demands long and system work, and in the management of the ministry want fast result, let and illusory, but suitable for the «beautiful» reporting.
Strategy realization of «Zero tolerance» is a question not of several days and even not several months, these are years, laborious and system work. But these years and the spent forces, in the long term will result in long-term, positive result. Here only who will be engaged in it?
Local governments, especially regarding small offenses are interested in realization of such strategy first of all. But for this purpose the corresponding tool is necessary for local authorities. Such tool could become – the Municipal (local) police given authority and opportunities necessary for this purpose.
How exactly bodies of municipal police could do it (hypothetically certainly) we will consider in articles of the bodies of local police devoted to activity as component of a law-enforcement system of our country. Today I suggest to review one indicative example of effective interaction of local authorities and local police from foreign experience because there is no domestic experience in these questions yet.

The municipal police – as it works
Perhaps, the most indicative, positive example in work of a sheaf «municipal authority the municipal police» is work of the mayor of New York Rudolph Giuliani and the chief of city police William Bratton (and his receivers) in the early nineties the last century.
In the 1980th years New York was overflowed by a crime wave. Every day there 6-7 murders and more than one and a half thousand other serious crimes were committed. It was dangerous to walk at night even on the central streets, and to go to the subway it was risky also in the afternoon.
Criminals and beggars on streets and metro stations were a commonplace, under legs the garbage rolled, walls of streets, stations and cars of the subway are entirely covered with graffiti. News about murders, the armed robberies, thefts and stealings of cars, for New York of those years were the ordinary. The situation was aggravated, no measures helped while in 1994 Rudolph Giuliani who appointed the police chief of the city of William Bratton was not elected the mayor of New York.
Establishing order on city streets and safety of its inhabitants were a basis of the election program of Giuliani and after the victory on elections he started its realization. As a basis the strategy of «Zero tolerance» to any violation of the law, even to the smallest was chosen, this strategy of Giuliani gave the command to develop in scales of all New York. Also during this period, for the first time put the «Broken windows theory» developed in the eighties by the American criminologists James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling into practice.
The police took essentially hard line in relation to all violators, even the smallest. Besides the persons who committed serious crimes police arrested everyone who drank alcohol or appeared on the street in a state of intoxication, brawled in public places, threw empty bottles and other garbage, painted walls, jumped through turnstiles in the subway, begged for money drivers for rubbing of glasses or committed other illegal acts. Almost each violator, irrespective of extent of offense went straight to prison. The permissiveness and impunity were replaced by a rigid order and inevitability of punishment And the result did not keep itself waiting - total criminalization of New York at first was stopped, and then the level of city crime began to decrease steadily. Through criminal New York by the end of the 1990th years became the safest megalopolis of the USA.
The chief of police Bratton and the mayor Giuliani so explained the choice of such strategy:
- «Small and insignificant, at first sight, offenses served as a signal for implementation of serious crimes».
In this article I briefly stated this very indicative example if it is interesting to someone to study it in more detail, I recommend to read the book by Rudolph Giuliani «Leader» where it rather in detail describes tactics and the strategy of fight against crime in New York.
From the above history it is possible to draw the following conclusion:
- the «Broken windows theory» and the strategy of «Zero tolerance» constructed on its basis really work if it is correct to apply them. Provided that the mayor and the chief of police look at a problem equally and solve it together, acting in it with uniform team.
And it is possible only in that case when the mayor has as a part of administration a full-fledged division of municipal police.




I want to express huge gratitude for the help in writing of this and other articles to Semyon Yulianov. In the blog Semyon states the opinion of current problems in activity of law enforcement agencies of our country and shares stories from own practice. In its articles objective and critical judgments well mix up with venomous comments and flashing humour. I am personally familiar with Semyon many years, this is the Professional from capital letter, more than a quarter of the century given to service in bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Prosecutor's office.



To share the opinion, to take part in discussions or to make offers,
you can in our group





ATTENTION
the text is translated by means of technical means of the translation
original language of the text – Russian
some words and phrases can be translated not correctly and not correspond to original sense


Back to contents | Back to the main menu