Civil Litigation Against Police in Australia: Exploring Its Extent, Nature and Implications for Accountability

Abstract

Much recent policing reform has been concerned with strengthening organisational and individual accountability through complaints, discipline systems and external oversight. Civil litigation against police has largely been ignored as an accountability measure. This research aimed to broaden the understanding of police litigation in Australia, and determine the implications for its use as an accountability mechanism. While the findings are not definitive, they generally conform with previous research outcomes that most cases initiated by civilians involve allegations of police abuse of power or process corruption. A new finding is that police sue their own organisations at about the same rate as they are sued by members of the public, although primarily for unfair dismissal. The results show a need for more detailed research, but highlight that civil litigation can form part of a regulatory web for identifying, controlling and preventing police misconduct.

The Role of the Court and the Constitution on Police Oversight in Zimbabwe: Prospects and Challenges

“…However, the question of who should investigate the police will remain unanswered. Another important observation on criminal prosecution is highlighted by Ransley et al (2007) when they remark, "though criminal prosecutions send powerful messages about police misconduct, they are relatively rare".…”

“…In the English-Speaking democracies, legal control through statutory regulation of police powers, as well as case law pertaining to civil litigation against police abuse, has taken centre stage (Jones, 2008). While the main purpose of civil litigation is to enable individuals to seek redress for wrongs committed against them, trends in the numbers and types of cases being brought can indicate organisational failures in procedures, training, and supervision, and also provide a way for individuals to seek accountability for police misconduct (Ransley, Anderson, & Prenzler, 2007). Criminal law, civil and administrative laws are important tools in the control of police (Roberg et al, 2009) and it is the duty of the courts to interpret these laws.…”

“…Though criminal prosecutions send powerful messages about police misconduct, they are relatively rare (Ransley, Anderson, & Prenzler, 2007).…”

“…Consequently, Smith, in Ransley, Anderson and Prenzler (2007) suggests that police unlawfulness is much more widespread than the criminal statistics suggest and that a person www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/jepf Journal of Economics and Public Finance Vol. 3, No.…”

To protect and serve: Restoring public confidence in the SAPS

“…43 For Mthethwa the obvious lesson from the Australian study is that he should not limit the engagement with civil claims to that outlined above, but should use these, and complaints against the police, to identify systemic problems within the police so that appropriate policy and other interventions may be developed and implemented.…”