The public perceives the police as corrupt, protecting criminal elements within its ranks, brutal and trigger-happy. Senior police and Government officials have admitted that the public complaints are, to a large extent, justified and committed themselves to reform.

But the question remains: Will the reform plans include strategies to ensure enhanced public protection?

Such reforms should aim at transforming the force into a professional, service-oriented organisation responsive to the needs of Kenyans. To do this, the current approach to policing which emphasises law enforcement must change to an approach that emphasises crime prevention and citizens' safety.

The Government's plans for police reform appear to focus on "modernising" the force by purchasing new equipment to enhance crime detection and prevention.

Admittedly, without appropriate or sufficient tools, the police are incapable of performing their role. However, if they are to succeed, it is essential that they win public trust and confidence. Mere modernisation of equipment will not bring about this trust. What is needed is to modernise police attitudes and approaches.

One of the major complaints against the police is that they are aggressive and prone to excessive and improper use of force. Does the reform plan include strategies to develop and implement a comprehensive Use of Force policy based on internationally accepted principles?

Police all over the world are authorised by law to use force. This means that one key element of police work is ability to coerce recalcitrant persons to comply with the law, sometimes with fatal consequences.

But force can be used only to promote community safety. The police have an obligation to protect even those who violate the law and ensure they are subjected to due process.

The right to use force gives police immense powers. It is critical for the policy to have clear guidelines on the levels of force that can be used, and to devise mechanisms to detect and act against officers who use illegal or excessive force.

Use of force can be described as a continuum where different tactics and levels of force may be used by officers, depending on the circumstances. At the lowest level are oral negotiations with offenders, which may be sufficient to achieve a legitimate objective. The highest level would be to use deadly force.

At any stage of the continuum, two principles must always apply. First, the force used must be proportionate to the circumstances. Deadly force, for example, is permissible only in self-defence and to prevent imminent destruction of life and property.

Second, police officers must use only the minimum force necessary to achieve the legitimate goal, and then the force must stop.

The Police Act states merely that the police have the power to use arms in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape if the officer believes that this is the only way to achieve either of the two objectives.

A Use of Force policy seems to be more clearly set out in the Kenya Police Regulations and the Force Standing Orders. Whereas it is commendable that guidelines do exist, tragically, both documents are not available to the public.

The Police Regulations and Force Standing Orders make it clear that use of firearms must always be a last resort. However, the documents neither define force nor distinguish between mere man-handling and deadly force. The various levels in the use of force continuum and options available at each stage are not articulated.

The Kenya police are publicly perceived as disregarding the principle of proportionality and abusing their power. Under the current legal set-up, there are only two avenues for reviewing incidents of excessive or improper use of force.

The first is internal review, which is not open to the public. The second is through the courts, which is time-consuming, expensive and often unsatisfactory.

If the police expect to improve their relationship with Kenyans, then independent institutions must be established with the authority to investigate and act against improper use of force.

Such a policy should establish the types of physical force that may be used when oral persuasion fails and what type of force involving weapons may be used when other forms of physical force are impracticable.

The Government and the police force must develop a broad range of means and equip officers with weapons to enable them to control situations without using deadly force.

The policy should also lay down situations that justify the use of different types of force and the weapons and ammunition needed.

It is important for the policy to include training to ensure proficient use of force tactics and procedures; requirements for internal and external review of all incidents involving use of force and fair and consistent disciplinary procedures for violations.

A Use of Force policy open to both public scrutiny and a review would be a big step towards achieving the Government’s stated objective of establishing a legitimate police service.

E-mail: michelle@humanrightsinitiative.org

Ms Kagari is the Co-ordinator for East Africa, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) Police Reform Programme.

Comments\Views about this article