Introduction
Civil oversight is an observation of the activities of state and municipal authorities, other state bodies, and officials and an assessment of the legality and effectiveness of these activities. In addition, it is an opportunity to take legal measures to suppress violations of human rights and freedoms. It should be noted that it is precisely civilian oversight, so it is impossible for the government to participate in it. The people who participate in this procedure usually do not work for the institution subject to inspections. The purpose of oversight is to critically evaluate the government’s actions and find solutions to improve its performance. Despite the disadvantages and shortcomings of such a system, it is an opportunity for increased monitoring of activities and professional standards.
Arguments For
Many volunteer and human rights organizations now encourage civic participation in public oversight or inspection groups. The opportunities for oversight are broad and involve activities that can directly lead to improved government performance and thus increased well-being of the population. One of the main arguments for this form of oversight is the will of the democratic power of the people. Only the public should decide the legitimacy of laws and the behavior of government structures. Police misconduct is a serious threat to society, so having oversight can solve that. For example, civilian oversight is often raised in the context of opposition to the police, namely the abuse of their powers. Recent examples include the Black Lives Matter movement, which arose after police detention abuses (Celestine et al., 2022). The campaign resulted from the will of the people, who could not tolerate such treatment of their fellow citizens. Consequently, the capabilities of countries’ citizens must be taken into account significantly when the rights to life and liberty are affected.
What follows from the above argument is that civilian oversight is a tool to regulate the accountability of law enforcement and government agencies. The creation of clean reporting, multiple documents, and standards makes it possible to make agencies’ work correct in terms of civil society and notions of morality and conscience. In addition, accountability increases the individual responsibility of government employees, which leads to more conscious professional behavior (Raffish, 2021). Hence, accountability is another positive feature of civilian oversight.
Among other things, civilian oversight is a form of open dialogue between the people and the authorities. It entails ensuring accessible processes for handling public complaints and submitting them to the government apparatus (Raffish, 2021). It allows the government to choose and edit its policies depending on the government’s feedback. Civilian oversight enhances public safety and preserves public and government trust. In this way, the civil society community’s control of the activities of the authorities is beneficial and can work effectively.
Arguments Against
Despite the significant advantages of civilian oversight, there are arguments against this movement. The most important statement is the excessive powers of civic centers and organizations, i.e., the presence of reporting, which will interfere with the regular operation. Oversight responsibilities lead to an increase in the workload of organizations that provide social services and, consequently, a decrease in time to serve the population (Stephens et al., 2018). Excessive oversight can lead to deterioration of overall work, and no matter how transparent reporting is, its excessive amount leads to stagnation. Administrations allocate employees to document maintenance and inspections, which leaves the workforce empty. Consequently, the organization loses the ability to strategize and make plans that could improve performance.
Another disadvantage of adopting broad civilian oversight is the lack of a proper procedure for handling public complaints. Even if the principles of democracy are respected, not all complaints received by the oversight committees are justified. This burdens the organizations and forces them to consider each appeal individually, wasting time (Stephens et al., 2018). The procedure for handling appeals is usually long and complicated, requiring reporting. More often than not, supervisory organizations cannot cope with requests and accept them more quickly than they should. In addition, the public is also capable of exceeding its authority and claiming violations that are not. There are fewer complaints than police mayhem, but the culture of cancellation always has a more substantial effect on the public authorities than on society (Stephens et al., 2018). Accordingly, the excessive number of appeals wastes time on unjustified cases but also worsens the position of the police in the community, despite their practical work.
Conclusion
Thus, civilian oversight is a form of monitoring by public independent organizations and committees of the performance of police and other government agencies. It is monitored and allows offenses to be detected and the subsequent punishment to be influenced. Oversight is an opportunity to improve government performance through monitoring and transparent reporting. Having a democratic will is one of the main advantages of civilian oversight. Although disadvantages such as the inability to fully process appeals and complaints and the waste of time on organizational aspects of the work continue to exist, the positive effects of citizen oversight define it as a valuable tool in society.
References
Celestine, A., Martin-Breteau, N., & Recoquillon, C. (2022). Introduction – Black Lives Matter: a transnational movement? Esclavages & Post-esclavages, 6.
Raffish, B. (2021). Civilian oversight as a police accountability mechanism. Lawfare.
Stephens, D. W., Scrivner, E., & Cambareri, J. F. (2018). Civilian oversight of the police in major cities. Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.