Civil Order Controls
Civil order control relates to responding, supervising, and controlling crowds or groups of people that may cause a breach of peace or upset calm in the society (Dammer and Albanese, 2010). In essence, civil order refers to control or management of civil disturbances such as demonstrations, illegal parades, protests, and sit- ins (Stevens, 2008). These disturbances are invariably caused by public outrage and are mainly directed at the government. Stevens (2008) argues that the rigorousness of such disturbances depends on the intensity of the outrage (p. 337). Civil order control may also relate to environmental and natural disasters.
Civil order control falls within the purview of the police’s duty to maintain peace and order. However, in many jurisdictions, this duty is discharges by other government agencies or by expert units within the police department (Dammer and Albanese, 2010). In special instances, citizens too can undertake the duty of civil order control (Stevens, 2008). In present times, this duty is discharged by agencies as opposed to the police. Dammer and Albanese (2010) argue that this is because the police may react excessively aggravating the situation, which can cause dire consequences (p. 95).
How America deals with civil order control
America favors a decentralized system thus civil order control is managed at the local level. There however are guidelines that apply to areas across the nation. It is essentially these policies that regulate civil order control in the country. In the policies, little distinction is made between civil order control and deviance control. Accordingly, majority of the activities relating to civil order control are carried out by regular police officers or special units within the police department (Dammer and Albanese, 2010).
There however instances when civil unrest becomes severe or life threatening, in which case the military may be called in. Such use of the military is rare and only limited to the duration of the unrest. On such basis, civil order control in America is done at two levels; the local/state, and the federal/national level. Ordinary civil unrests are dealt with by the local law enforcement agencies.
The federal government intervenes if the unrest persists for long or if the local agencies are unable to control it. Additionally, the federal government may intervene if the civil unrest threatens or employs the use of violent acts. The manner in which the federal government intervenes is regulated by the Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2 (also referred to as Operation Garden Plot) (U.S. Department of Defense Staff, 2002).
When a civil unrest begins, the first line of action is the regular police. The police arrive at the scene to try to maintain order. If the unrest persists, specialized units within the police department such as the S.W.A.T are called to take over the situation. The unit may call in assistance from federal agencies such as the A.T.F, D.E.A, F.B.I, and the National Guard. If these agencies are unable to deal with the disorder, the military will be involved. The military is the final line of action and are allowed to use whatever means necessary to achieve civil order.
Comparative analysis
As alluded to earlier, the way a country deals with civil order control depends on the structure of government. Accordingly, in Saudi Arabia, Japan, and China where a centralized system is favored, civil order control is executed by different divisions in a larger organization. Saudi Arabia utilizes a Special Forces unit (pilgrims and festival police force). Similarly, Japan uses a specialized unit referred to as Kidotai (Parker, 2001). In China, the Ministry of Public security has the primary duty of civil order control (Dammer and Albanese, 2010). These countries thus vary with the U.S in terms of structural organization.
England however is similar to U.S in terms of structural arrangement. Like the U.S, civil order in England is carried out by the regular police. The police department in England also has specialized units that assist the regular police in maintaining civil control.
All these countries are however similar to the extent that they use the military in extreme circumstances. In all these countries, whenever the military is called, they are allowed to use whatever means necessary to ensure that civil order is maintain.
There is however a disparity in the means employed, either by the military or by the primary civil order control unit. While England and America maintain a high level of respect for human rights and equality, the other countries have in the past shown a penchant for disregard of such rights. This is particularly so with China and Saudi Arabia. Participants in civil unrest are treated as dissidents and are in most cases subjected to callous treatment such as detention, cruel punishment, and suspension.
A good example is the incident in Tiananmen Square, China, in 1989. Over 800 people lost their lives when the Chinese army open fire to protestors in a bid to quell a demonstration, to date the Chinese government states that the actions were justified (Dammer and Albanese, 2010).
Saudi Arabia also stands out in callous treatment, especially in punishment for wrong doing. The justice system is heavily influenced by Islamic law which allows for punishments such as amputation and flogging. Islamic law also does not respond lightly to questioning authority. Accordingly, civil unrests that question government authority are severely dealt with. It is arguable that the reduced crime rate in Saudi Arabia is attributable to these punishments. The country however experiences unrest during the pilgrimage that takes place annually.
Japan however stands out among all these nations in the sense that civil unrest is quite rare. The culture of Japan emphasizes hard work, order, and discipline, any misbehavior by a person not only reflects badly on them but also their family too. Accordingly, instances of civil unrest are very few. Such is the discipline and order of the Japanese that it is reported that there was no civil disorder during the Sendai earthquake in 2011. For that reason, civil disorder is not a problem in Japan.
In relation to the use of other agencies in civil order control, only Saudi Arabia compares to the U.S. When the Special forces cannot restore order, the National Guard is called in to assist (Dammer and Albanese, 2010), before calling the Saudi Army. In China, Japan, and England, the military is called in once the primary civil order control unit is overwhelmed.
References
Dammer, H. R. and Albanese, J.S. (2010). Comparative Criminal Justice Systems (4th Ed.). CA:
Cengage Learning. Print.
Parker, L. C. (2001). The Japanese Police System Today: A Comparative Study. New York: M.
E. Sharpe. Print.
Stevens, D. (2008). An Introduction to American Policing. New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Print.
U.S. Department of Defense Staff. (2002). 21st Century U.S Army Civil Disturbances Field
Manual: Crowd Control Riot Squads and Batons, Extreme Force Options, Apprehension and Detention. FL: Progressive Management. Print.
