Christopher Bryan | A look at public order in a contemporary society

Generally, people prefer to live in a society where they feel safe from being victims of daily crimes. However, this requires good public order. A good public order is an environment where citizens can feel safe and free to go about their lawful business or get involved in their social or professional activities without the fear of being preyed upon by unscrupulous individuals. The maintenance of public order and the rule of law is a key responsibility of the sovereign state, just like defending the nation from external aggression.

To conform to good public order, and the rule of law, agencies are needed to enforce those rules. Public order implies a harmonious state where people in society are at ease and in peace with each other while using the public space and facilities provided for them without the fear of being preyed upon. The focus of the agencies of the state must be to demonstrate that public order is for the greater good of society.

The citizenry needs proper public amenities to help in changing and maintaining good holistic conduct and an appreciation for all occupants of the space. This includes not just security officers in these spaces to provide security, but also proper amenities such as walkways, directional and warning signs, public sanitary conveniences, adequate lighting facilities, managed vending facilities, and proper garbage collection and disposal arrangements, to name a few.

Good public-order management has beneficial implications for crime reduction. David Weisberg and John E. Eck (2004) found that public order policing strategies, such as aggressive patrolling and zero-tolerance policies, were associated with the reduction of crimes, and C. Ray Jeffers (1977) argued that a well-designed public space could reduce crime rates by creating an environment that is resistant to criminal activities.

PRIME FUNCTION OF THE STATE

Irrespective of the nature of a polity, whether democratic or autocratic, federal or unitary, the maintenance of public order is universally recognised as the prime function of the State. Anarchy would result if the State failed to discharge this duty. Such persistent anarchy would lead to decay, destruction, and the eventual disintegration of the State. In a pluralistic democracy like ours, political polarisation sometimes throws up issues leading to conflicts, which escalate into public disorder.

Public-order crime should be distinguished from political crime. In the former, although the identity of the “victim” may be indirect and sometimes diffuse, cumulatively, the community suffers. In a political crime, the State perceives itself to be the victim and criminalises the behaviour it considers threatening. Thus, public-order crime includes consensual crime and victimless crimes, and it asserts the need to use the law to maintain order both in the legal and moral sense.

Public-order crimes are acts considered illegal because they conflict with social policy, accepted moral rules, and public opinion. These generally non-violent acts may offend or threaten people who witness them. They are often outside the general norms of morality and behaviour. These include activities like prostitution, possession of illegal drugs, public drunkenness, disturbing the peace, public nuisance and indecency, etc. They are usually non-violent and treated as misdemeanours with relatively light penalties.

Public order, however, is the domain of the police or other policing agencies, courts, and prison services, all of which make up the criminal-justice system. It is important to understand that this system is chain-linked, and all elements need to work together. High crime rates are a drag on community development and a great burden on some households that cannot afford to relocate. Successful control of theft, vandalism, public disorder, and especially violence sets the stage for increasing property values, investment, job growth, and a higher standard of living.

STRUCTURED COOPERATION

Combating crime and preventing accidents and disturbances call for structured cooperation between the police and other authorities and agencies. The police are among the most important actors in enforcing good public order, but the responsibility for maintaining, conforming, and upholding the rule of law rests with everyone using the space.

“It is through the rule of law,” wrote Harold Laski, “that we have sought to avoid not merely the obvious dangers of unfettered executive discretion in administration; we have also sought to ensure that the citizen shall have his rights decided by a body of men whose security of tenure is safeguarded against the shifting currents of public opinion.” The eminent jurist, Locke, put it succinctly, “Wherever law ends, tyranny begins.” By putting the lives and liberty of common citizens at risk, the possible collapse of public order and the rule of law has the potential to destroy the faith of citizens in their government and erode its legitimacy. Large-scale violence and disruption can threaten a country’s social fabric and its ability to function effectively. If there is a failure of public order, it is because of the inadequacies of the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary and we need to address them holistically to change things for the greater good of the general society.

Christopher Bryan is a physical and corporate security consultant. Send feedback to christopher.bryan1000@gmail.com and columns@gleanerjm.com.