An Overview of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics
Law enforcement ethics, which encompass the profound behavioral standards and obligations that guide police officers, detectives, and even administrative personnel in discharging their duties, are essential aspects of police work. These ethics codify the conduct expected from law enforcement professionals and have served as invaluable tools in protecting the communities they serve.
The Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, published by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, is a renowned document that provides a common framework for law enforcement officers to understand, at each level of their careers, what is expected of them. The Code’s value lies within its ability to standardize practices, behaviors, and expectations across departments, states, and even countries. Dedicated to the protection of constitutional rights and civil liberties, the Code assures communities that their public safety professionals are upholding the highest standards of professionalism, values, and ethical conduct.
Since they are typically the first responders to almost any situation, police officers must also be held to fixed standards of accountability, fairness, and objectivity . This is particularly true in an environment that is constantly producing threats to the safety of citizens, whether from criminals, environmental disasters, or other public safety hazards. That is why the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics is so essential to a citizen’s faith in their law enforcement officials. The Code represents a commitment to the values of respect, fairness, integrity, duty, honor, courage, and loyalty. When these values are upheld, the required professional standards will follow and a community’s public safety professionals will be seen as reliable, effective, and trustworthy.
Accordingly, when officers are confronted with tempting situations—with a cash reward, an unlawful inducement to act, or a sympathetic ear to their illegal actions—they have been taught that they can choose not to indulge their temptations and try to uphold their values instead. That is why law enforcement professionals must know their Law Enforcement Code of Ethics and honor it. It is the profession’s most basic and uncompromising agreement to act with integrity and in the service of the public interest.
Core Tenets of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics
Every law enforcement agency has a code of ethics. The code of ethics outlines the policies and procedures that govern the agency and its officers. One of the most often used is the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, adopted by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP).
Honesty
Honesty is the number one principle addressed by law enforcement’s code of ethics. Law enforcement officers work under a duty of loyalty-a duty to protect the public, keep the peace, and uphold the law. For officers to uphold this duty of loyalty, they must also commit to honesty above all else. Officers, even in minor situations, should never lie or mislead others. Lying or misleading the public or other officers is never in the public’s best interest. Honesty also includes, but is not limited to, refraining from acts of dishonesty such as stealing or cheating.
Integrity
Part of an officer’s duty of loyalty is maintaining integrity to the public and other officers. Integrity requires that an officer’s actions always be honorable. In other words, an officer must act in a manner that his or her ethics and morals are deserving of trust and respect. Every decision made by an officer should be in the best interest of the public and an honorable reflection of the agency.
Fairness
Maintaining fairness above all else is critical to the public’s trust. Law enforcement requires an officer to treat everyone fairly, and with dignity and respect. An officer’s duty of carrying out his or her role as an officer requires that the officer refrains from demoralizing any members of the public.
Respect
A lack of respect for others is never acceptable for an officer of the law. Part of the role of an officer in the community is to demonstrate to the public an outward respect for all people regardless of their diversity. Through an officer’s respect for the public, the public will also recognize an officer’s respect for their role as public servant. Whether the public is aware of it or not, the conduct of one officer is representative of the entire agency.
Accountability
A law enforcement agency is accountable to the public, whether they want to be accountable or not. Members of the public must know that their officers of the law are held accountable for any misconduct. In addition to being held accountable for their actions, officers should also be held accountable for the actions of other officers. Accountability requires that they comply with laws and regulations, and enforce the laws and related regulations.
The Law Enforcement Code of Ethics adopted by the International Association of Chiefs of Police is similar to codes of ethics adopted by many law enforcement agencies across the country. In addition to these core principles, the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics also recognizes that officers have a duty to uphold the constitution, support the democratic process, be impartial, and never allow personal feelings to affect their conduct.
Background and History of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics
The evolution of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics is a testament to the ongoing development of professional standards within law enforcement. Historically, the roots of ethics in police work can be traced back to the early 19th century with the founding of the London Metropolitan Police in 1829. Founded on the core principles of preventing crime, preserving order, and controlling disorder, this original ethical framework formed the basis for modern policing. It wasn’t until the mid-20th century, however, that the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics—part of the larger Law Enforcement Excalibur—was introduced. Established in 1956 by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) to codify best practices in ethical conduct, the Code outlined sixteen standards that cushioned officers against the challenges of moral dilemmas on the street.
Over the years, significant changes have been made to the Code to reflect the evolving nature of policing. For example, a critical amendment in 1973 expanded the Code to address and prohibit forms of discrimination based on gender, race, religion, and sexual orientation. In the context of increasing friction between law enforcement and racial and ethnic minorities across the nation, this amendment helped foster an environment of inclusion and equality not just on the street but within policing agencies themselves.
In the late 20th century, further amendments addressed new ethical challenges including issues such as corruption, use of firearms, and handling evidence. By the 21st century, the Code had adapted new standards to cover areas such as social media usage and transparency. The changes to the Code over time not only show the dynamic nature of policing in American society but also demonstrate that ethical guidelines are necessary to ensure officers remain accountable and impartial. The origins of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics thus continue to shape contemporary ethical conduct in law enforcement.
Impact of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics on Police Behavior
The Law Enforcement Code of Ethics is not only a series of aspirational statements. It serves as the foundation for complex police decision-making as well as for day-to-day conduct on the street.
As a recent example, I served as the expert trial witness last year for two deputy sheriffs who had been fired for having allowed a woman to walk home from their station house after she had complained of domestic violence. The deputies had arrested her boyfriend earlier in the day and locked him up. A scary-looking woman captain, meanwhile, had yelled at the deputies, "Call that boy’s mama and tell her he’s in jail!" That lead to bad morale, and because of other complaints made by other people, the captain later reviewed the action of the deputies and fired them.
The deputies had told a detective not one month previously that they were being encouraged by their superiors to allow domestic violence victims to use a taxi voucher program to get home, which meant that such victims could be released to spend the night with their batterer. The detectives’ supervisor had said that the issue of whether to use the vouchers was to be left to the individual deputy’s discretion.
In most cities, domestic violence is a big issue and police departments can be politically vulnerable to domestic violence complaints. In his testimony at trial, the captain said that there had been a "very strong push in this department to be responsive" to such complaints. Thus, the random woman walking the streets alone at night with her groceries was of no significance.
The jury (in a civil rights case against the police department and the captain individually) rightly found in favor of the deputies, and they returned a hefty verdict. The Code’s principles applied here quite nicely. For example, the Code’s preamble begins: As a law enforcement officer, my fundamental duty is to serve mankind. As a peace officer, my duty is to safeguard lives, protect the innocent against deception, the weak against oppression or intimidation, and the peaceful against violence or disorder, and to respect the constitutional rights of all men to liberty, equality and justice.
The Code then goes on to set forth additional principles about honesty, impartial treatment and accountability. Those principles were obviously violated in the firing of the deputies.
Issues in Uphholding the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics
Challenges in Upholding the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics
The adoption of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics is a commitment to accountability, professionalism, and service within the law enforcement agency. However, this commitment often faces numerous challenges that impede the ability to uphold the code effectively. From issues of bias and systemic inequality in modern policing to a lack of legal authorization and internal interoperability, a plethora of barriers exist when attempting to enforce the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics.
In many cases, police agencies across the country and around the world suffer from a lack of authority to act on behaviors that violate the Code of Ethics due to weak or poorly defined state and federal laws. In fact, in many states, law enforcement culture itself is at odds with the efforts to enact change. A recent document created by the Police Executive Research Forum indicates that despite existing laws, police agencies create informal codes and norms that they refuse to change, in cases where change is necessary.
A similar report form the Police Foundation in Washington, D.C., on the effects of continued scrutiny over the United States’ police forces suggests that police officers who turn a blind eye on inappropriate behavior by their peers are simply following a learned behavior by their superior officers. Officers seem to turn a blind eye on inappropriate behavior by senior officers or commanders, regardless of the ethical implications of such behavior.
Bias and systemic inequality in teaching and training on these issues further exacerbate these problems. Where such training is present, it often lacks sophistication and relevance to the nature or potential perpetration of discriminatory practices in that police agency. A lack of educational programs on the laws and policies that may affect law enforcement agencies also perpetuates these issues. With little or no access to culturally competent schools, reform programs, or materials, law enforcement personnel are ill-equipped to understand or respond to some of the more complex issues involved in enforcing the Legal Enforcement Code of Ethics.
Another obstacle to the successful enforcement of the code of ethics is a lack of interoperability and communication between authorities at various levels: municipal, state, and federally. An arbitrary geographic limit dependent on an officer’s jurisdiction leaves officers with little recourse to address violations of the Code of Ethics beyond their own precincts, or possibly beyond the same municipality.
Recognizing these challenges is the first step toward addressing them effectively. Law enforcement agencies can benefit from taking a proactive approach to improving the internal mechanisms for accountability that can help them adhere to the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics.
Training in the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics
A crucial aspect of effectively implementing the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics is ensuring that all officers are properly trained and educated on its tenets. By making the code a focal point of their training, law enforcement agencies can foster a deeper understanding of not only the letter but also the goals and spirit of the code, which can help enforce adherence throughout the department. Training should be an ongoing process — it can’t be enough for an officer to have fulfilled his training requirements upon graduating from the police academy. Officers should regularly participate in training exercises on the code so that they develop and maintain a strong sense of obligation regarding ethical conduct.
Training is often broken down into two categories: initial and ongoing development. During initial training, officers learn about the fundamentals of ethical policing, including the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics’ guidelines regarding preserving human life, respecting the rights of all persons and making fair, impartial decisions. Training sessions might include presentations on the meaning of the code and its general concepts, as well as practice scenarios or case studies that illustrate how the code might apply to a particular incident. Ongoing training should build upon these foundations while delving deeper into topics such as the potential consequences of unethical behavior , the importance of combating perceived public apathy toward policing ethics and creating an accountability system for officers to report known violations of ethical conduct.
Departments should also invest in a number of other methods to promote the Code of Ethics. Chiefly among these is a complete re-examination of the department’s mission statement and guiding philosophies — are they truly reflective of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics? If not, they must be individually retooled to support and correspond with the code’s overarching principles. A comprehensive communications strategy encompassing the department’s entire chain of command should be developed to support the implementation of the code, which must include clear and uniform messaging to officers and the community at large regarding the department’s commitment to ethical behavior. Police departments must also design and execute a transparent policy for investigating perceived code of ethics violations and carrying out disciplinary measures against those who have acted unethically.
By moving beyond simple classroom discussions and reexamining a department’s mission, strategies and policies in light of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, police departments can create a truly robust and effective system of ethical policing.
Technology and the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics
Amidst the ongoing Seattle Police Department scandal, the ever growing anonymity of private Big Data has come under much discussion here in Washington. Both legislators and judges have expressed concern over the legality and ethical use of these data in policing. The very public nature of police work – where the actions of officers are so repeatedly analyzed and reported upon by the media – seems at odds with the fact that officers themselves are becoming less and less known to the public. This is all due in part to the vast, often unregulated resources of the Big Data world.
For example, data sold by a "people finder," Spokeo, is collected from hundreds of public and private databases. The information obtained from these sources is imprecise, if not flatly inaccurate. And yet, this type of data is now in the hands of law enforcement. Just last month, Gov. Jay Inslee signed into law the E-Verify verification tools to help combat human trafficking. The law allows law enforcement to access this information, but in response to his signature, a dozen civil rights organizations wrote to Inslee to urge him to veto it. The concern is that over-commercialized information tailored to law enforcement fosters a policing system that fails to respect the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
In recent years, the safety and security of citizens has become an increasingly common justification for the rise of high-tech surveillance tools. Implicit in this is the consideration of the privacy of every individual being watched through these tools. Currently, the U.S. Constitution does not provide a mechanism to limit what data law enforcement can obtain, leaving much of it up to interpretation by both lawmakers and law enforcement. Allowing such technology to be any more commonly utilized by law enforcement will only serve to exacerbate issues regarding irresponsible use of this sensitive data.
The concern for many lawmakers and legal experts is that no one set of rules yet exists. What is clear, however, is that the fate of biometric lasers, artificial intelligence, and body cameras now lies in the hands of the few. "By and large, English judges, English lawyers have been vehemently opposed to overreach by the police in terms of the acquisition of data from digital devices," said Technology Lawyer at Balderton. "This is stretching that," he said.
Public Perception and the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics
Assessed against the tenets of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, the recent spate of deadly force incidents has illuminated a general disconnect of the basic foundational principles of ethical conduct, as well as officers’ interpretation of their obligations to enforce them, and I think the public’s evaluation of these events. If we take this on a grand scale, and assume the majority of officers take their obligation to serve the public with fairness as a cornerstone of what they do, they cannot be fairly assessed in the same pocket along side those who would use their badge to subvert the public interest. But if we look at it on a case-by-case basis, as it is coming to us now in unprecedented volume, the reality is that every incident must be measured against public policies that require full, objective, and fair investigation. To the extent there is an us versus them culture between law enforcement and the community we serve, to that same extent those who would cause and perpetuate a divide should be quickly removed from positions of authority. We stand at a cross-roads in law enforcement. We can return to our values and ethics based operations that have been the heart of truly successful agencies, or we can let those who would seek to manipulate the situation for personal/end of career gain win.
International Views on the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics
In an international context, similar mechanisms are used to establish standards of conduct for law enforcement personnel. As in the United States, law enforcement code of ethics vary in wording and provisions from country to country, but the substantive approach remains fundamentally the same. While all countries do not expressly adopt a police code of ethics, the vast majority of countries ensure that some criteria exist governing the professional conduct of their law enforcement personnel. Typically, the existing codes of ethics are primarily declaratory in nature. Preceding the creation of a relatively formal and written police code of ethics in 1956, most European nationals adhered to the recommendation of the Committee of Minister of Council of Europe provided them with a recommendation on the determination of the principles of professional conduct of the police. The recommendation asked national authorities to incorporate these principles into their domestic regulations or, if translation was deemed to be inappropriate, to adopt codes containing similar provisions. Since then a number of countries have drafted codes of ethics that set forth the appropriate standard of behaviour for their police personnel. Drawing on the work of the United Nations, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) adopted its Model Policy for Law Enforcement Code of Ethics. The IACP Model Policy has been used by many countries as an influential guideline on the drafting of their own code of ethics. The text adopted should be considered as a recommended standard only and countries are free to modify the formalised text to meet their own needs and circumstances. Primarily, the law code of ethics does not assume to prohibit any type of conduct and rather offers a set of best practices for the implementation of a police force of a particular country.
Future Trends in Policing and the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics
While automation and AI have eclipsed the code of ethics for law enforcement in their rapid onset, ethical policing will be demanding progressive assessment and revision to keep pace with these changes. Already, the rise of biometrics and other information mining technologies has already resulted in some potential challenges to the law enforcement code of ethics, which may in turn result in the need for revision of the code itself. And the calculus does not end there. The rise of self-driving vehicles and drones are among a few of the yet-to-come advances that might outpace current law enforcement ethical standards. For instance, to what standard should a law enforcement agency hold a self-driving vehicle to? Does it get held to the same standard as an autonomous drone? And how do these vehicles react to situations where human beings are faced with real-time ethical dilemmas? These are just a few of the questions that will arise in the coming years . Nevertheless, there is still an opportunity to get ahead of these potentially disruptive changes to law enforcement in order to find a methodology for answering these potentially challenging questions. The same cannot be said for previous advances — the advent of civilian police forces killed off mounted law enforcement officers and foot patrols. Thankfully, law enforcement is now thinking ahead in regard to robotics and other advanced policing. In this context, making an effort to update and improve the law enforcement code of ethics is an opportunity that cannot be missed. If we can make choices ahead of times in a way that demonstrates our commitment to ethical policing practices that reverberates through the legal system, those changes have real power to transform the landscape.