About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

77 Crime L. & Soc. Change 1 (2022)

handle is hein.journals/crmlsc77 and id is 1 raw text is: Crime, Law and Social Change (2022) 77:1-25 https:I/doi.org/l0.1007/si0611-021-09981-y Professionalism versus democracy? Historical and institutional analysis of police oversight mechanisms in three Asian jurisdictions Lawrence Ka-ki Ho - Jason Kwun-Hong Chan' - Ying-tung Chan' Garth den Heyer - Jen-Shuo Hsu' . Arata Hirai2 Accepted: 22 July 2021 /Published online: 4 August 2021 ©The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2021 Abstract Should police be checked by the police or by representatives with public mandates? This article aims to respond to this frequently asked question by comparing two sets of institutional arrangements in police oversight mechanisms under three Asian regimes with different levels of democratization: Hong Kong, Japan, and Taiwan. Professionalism and transcendency are often prioritized by the Hong Kong authorities as the merits of the internal affairs model, over independent investigation capacity or elected appointees. Paradoxically, its police oversight counterparts under two neighbouring constitutionally democratic Asian jurisdictions still face critiques, given their institutional proximity with the civilian control model prevailing in the Western countries. What kind of institutional setting better oversight the police? We conducted a historical-institutional analysis by making use of publicly accessible documents, examining the evolution, reviewing the missions and format of empow- erment, and weighing the strength and key insufficiencies of these three police over- sight mechanisms. Our study primarily finds that historical conjunctures and regime values appear decisive in the evolution of these bodies. The police oversight mecha- nisms in Japan and Taiwan place more emphasis on public representation and legal empowerment to check police power, which provides longer institutional stability than that of Hong Kong, which was credited on personnel capability or transpar- ency of the investigation process. The study also finds that the competence of per- sonnel and the transparency of the investigation process appear not comparable to the importance of the public representation and legal authorization of the oversight agencies in determining public trust towards the oversight mechanism. E Lawrence Ka-ki Ho lawrenceho@eduhk.hk Extended author information available on the last page of the article I_) Springer

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most