Police and brutality
Police brutality is a common occurrence in developing and developed countries around the world. Recent stories emerging from South Africa and Australia are cases in point. On Tuesday March 5th, anti-regime blog, Coupfourpointfive, released video links to Fiji’s own brand of brutality. It wasn’t long before traditional and social media were saturated with commentary.
The aim of this piece is not merely to reiterate the standard response of horror and indignation. While such reactions are appropriate and warranted, the endless stream of condemnation is only likely to achieve so much. It is already abundantly clear where the international community stands on the issue, and many Fijians perceive the criticism as coming from patronising outsiders.
We need to go beyond the condemnation, and take a critical look at some of the main arguments in defense of the beatings. These arguments are frequently put forward on blogs, in comments on social media and heard over a shell of kava. To have any chance of changing minds, we must move beyond simply screaming, ‘this is wrong!’ – even if it is.
Common reactions when accusations of brutality fly, include:
– These people are criminals and they deserve it
– The police are just doing their job.
– Beatings like this make us safer.
– It is just part of our culture.
– Foreigners just don’t get it. Who cares what they think?
A critical examination of these arguments is a worthwhile exercise not only for Fiji but all Pacific island countries and indeed, the world.
‘These people are criminals and they deserve it’
This argument is attractive because of its simplicity. If we believe this, though, then we have to believe that all criminals and their crimes are equally bad. But a young boy stealing a chocolate from a corner shop is not the same as a middle-aged man stealing a car. Just as a prisoner that escapes to visit his dying mother, is not the same as a prisoner that escapes to rob a bank. Would these prisoners deserve the same beating? In the heat of the moment, could we expect police accustomed to handing out beatings to stop, listen to a re-captured prisoner and take extenuating circumstances into account? Probably not.
So if society decides that it is acceptable for police to dish out their own punishments, then we are by extension assuming that all police have the incredible ability to:
- Instantly determine a person’s guilt or innocence.
- Take into account all the evidence and the special circumstances.
- Ignore their adrenalin, which must be high at the time of an arrest.
- Ignore their potential biases or feelings of hurt pride.
- Ignore the pull of a ‘mob mentality’.
- Overcome all these issues and instantly decide on a fair beating (if such a thing can exist at all).
I remember the outrage I felt when two of my female friends were attacked and robbed in Suva. I wished some friends and I could have been there so we could have fought the thugs and really given it to them. My usually peaceful friend even said he wished he could kill them. But, suppose we did beat one up. What happens the next day? Would this thief have suddenly been ‘fixed’? What if we really hurt him, or accidentally killed him? Clearly, in the heat of the moment, when adrenalin is flowing, we say things we don’t really mean and perhaps do things we later regret. Making clear-minded decisions on fair punishments in the heat of the moment is virtually impossible. When we stop and think, it becomes obvious why judicial systems exist and why the role of the security forces is supposed to be limited.
‘The police are just doing their job’
No. In this case, Fiji’s security forces went way beyond their remit. As stated above, there are reasons why police aren’t given the multiple roles of enforcer, judge, and executioner. Primarily it is about protecting the human rights of society’s most vulnerable and allowing people the opportunity to have a fair trial before any judgment is passed.
One doesn’t need to look any further than the Fiji police’s own website to know with certainty that what took place in the video was outside of their job description and expected conduct. The Fiji Police code includes these lines:
I will practice self discipline in word and deed both on and off duty.
I will never use more force than necessary in the performance of my duty.
I will resist the temptation to participate in any activity which is improper or which can be misconstrued as improper.
When people suggest that it is the security force’s role to decide on punishments, they are also implying that judges and the legal system are either unnecessary or incapable of doing so. (If there is a feeling that the courts in Fiji are not doing their job, then that is a whole other issue that needs to be addressed separately).
There is no denying that police everywhere have an incredibly difficult job. They face immense pressure on a day-to-day basis and the amount of restraint they need to exercise with unruly people is taxing. These difficulties acknowledged, it is their job to show restraint and demonstrate their faith in the judicial system of the country they serve. It is their job to act as role models for the people, and it is their job not to abuse their positions of power and authority.
‘Beatings like this make us safer’
If these beatings have been happening, and they work, why are prisoners still escaping? Why is crime still regarded as being too high? Surely by now such beatings, which people suggest have been happening all along, should have made things safe by now?
If people in authority, whom we look up to, defend violent punishment as an appropriate way to solve problems, this is a message that the youth and the public at large will take on board. If those in power legitimise unchecked and excessive violence, it only increases the likelihood that violence will in turn be used by other sections of society against each other, and indeed, perhaps against the security forces themselves.
And when suspected criminals know that they can expect this kind of extrajudicial beating, we can assume they will do anything not to get caught.
Finally, it is worth taking a look at the people most likely to make the argument that such beatings make us safer. It often comes from people in positions of power, the elites of society who can rely on their status for an almost guaranteed level of safety. It is often those people least likely to receive a beating that are the quickest to stand by police brutality. It’s easier to support human rights abuses when you’re not among a society’s most vulnerable.
‘It is just part of our culture’
Police brutality is not part of Fijian culture – such abuse of power is part of human nature. And this is precisely the reason why we need to build societies that curb damaging behaviour. The fact that police brutality occurs all over the world reminds us of the ever-present potential for power to corrupt and that we must be vigilant in helping to ensure that people don’t abuse their positions in society. Respecting the rule of law and abiding by judicial systems can help us overcome our personal weaknesses – and all humans have weaknesses.
Brutality does not have to exist in any culture, it is allowed to exist in certain areas of each society by certain people at certain times. Culture is not static – it is ever-changing, so using culture as an excuse for violence is just being lazy. If and when the majority of a population decides that they are against violence, then communities will be able to foment change. But change requires bold civil society and bold leadership and unfortunately, if the experience in other countries is anything to go by, it also seems to require numerous well-publicised cases of severe injury and death of prisoners in custody. In this age of mobile video technology, publicising such cases is becoming an increasingly viable option.
‘Foreigners don’t get it. Who cares what they think anyway?’
Whenever international media, international governments or civil society criticise events unfolding in another country, it’s common, even natural, to react defensively. This is understandable, especially given the condescending tone that many such reports tend to take.
Outsiders can’t dictate what the people of Fiji should do in this or any situation, but the level of attention this video and the regime’s response to it have garnered signifies that an important conversation is there to be had.
The international community isn’t always clever –or right– in the way it points out issues, but it can help countries hold a mirror up to themselves and decide if they are truly satisfied with what they see. At the end of the day, the decision remains in the hands of the Fijian people. For any who continue to support police brutality, it is essential that they sit down and force themselves to watch the entire nine minutes of torture that prompted these most recent discussions in the first place.
The world is watching (and judging)
Despite the resentment many feel toward the outside world’s criticism of local issues, the fact remains that videos like these go viral, draw significant attention, and then colour the way the world views a country. When a video of a man being dragged behind a police van in South Africa got out – the world judged. When footage of a burly officer in Australia slamming a skinny handcuffed man to the road was released, the world judged. This is how global media function. It shines a light on the things we, as nations, would sometimes prefer to keep in the dark, and deal with (or not) by ourselves. Like it or not, we live in an information age and right now, the light from outside is shining brightly on Fiji.
