CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION TO ETHICS

"It is not who is right, but what is right that counts." Thomas Huxley

Learning Objectives

At the end of this chapter, the student will be able to:

1. Debate the major arguments concerning the importance of ethics in law

enforcement.

2. Distinguish the issues relating to morals, ethics, values, ethical codes,

ethical standards, and ethical dilemmas.

3. Contrast individual and organizational values and responsibilities.

4. Analyze an ethical dilemma and the different ethical theories.

5. Contrast issues that include decision making, discretion, and the structure
of accountability.

6. Differentiate between organizational and individual misconduct and issues

related to consequences and liability.

7. Using critical thinking, evaluate the moral issues related to a course of

action including the resolution of an ethical dilemma.

Ethics

How should you live? Shall you aim at happiness or knowledge, virtue, or the
creation of beautiful objects? If you choose happiness, will it be your own or
the happiness of all? And what of the more particular questions that face
you: is it right to be dishonest in a good cause? Are you justified to kill a
criminal in the guise of protecting the innocent? Is it correct to steal from the
rich and give it to the poor? Can you justify living in opulence while
elsewhere in the world people are starving? Is going to war justified in cases
where it is likely that innocent people will be killed? Is it right to give a
passing grade to a student because he is graduating and the parents
approached the teacher? Is it wrong to clone a human being or to destroy
human embryos in medical research? What are your obligations, if any, to
the generations of humans who will come after you and to the nonhuman
animals with whom you share the planet?

Ethics deals with such questions at all levels. Its subject consists of the
fundamental issues of practical decision making, and its major concerns
include the nature of ultimate value and the standards by which human
actions can be judged right or wrong. In the law enforcement profession,
ethics serve as a guide on how to decide on a particular situation and
condition if the law is silent on the matter.

What is Ethics?

Ethics also called morality, or moral philosophy is the discipline that is

concerned with what is morally good and bad, right and wrong. The term is
also applied to any system or theory of moral values or principles. It is based
on well-founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans
ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society,
fairness, or specific virtues.

Additionally, ethics also refers to the study and development of one's ethical
standards. As feelings, laws, and social norms can deviate from what is
ethical, it is necessary to regularly examine one's standards to ensure that
they are reasonable and well-founded. Ethics also means, then, the
continuous effort of studying moral beliefs and moral conduct and striving to
ensure that the institutions live up to standards that are reasonable and
solidly-based.

Although ethics has always been viewed as a branch of philosophy, its all-
embracing practical nature links it with many other areas of study, including
anthropology, biology, economics, history, politics, sociology, and theology.
Ethics remains distinct from such disciplines because it is not a matter of
factual knowledge in the way that the sciences and other branches of inquiry
are. Instead, it has to do with determining the nature of normative theories
and applying these sets of principles to practical moral problems.

In reality, the meaning of "ethics" is hard to pin down, and the views many
people have about ethics are shaky. Many people tend to equate ethics with
their feelings. But being ethical is not a matter of following one's feelings. A
person following his or her feelings may recoil from doing what is right.
Feelings frequently deviate from what is ethical.

Nor should one identify ethics with religion. Most religions, of course,
advocate high ethical standards. If ethics were confined to religion, then
ethics would apply only to religious people. But ethics. applies as much to
the behavior of the atheist as to that of the devout religious person. Being
ethical is also not the same as following the law. The law often incorporates
ethical standards to which most citizens subscribe. But laws, like feelings,
can deviate from what is ethical.

Moreover, if being ethical were doing "whatever society accepts," then to

find out what is ethical, one would have to find out what society accepts. The
lack of social consensus on many issues makes it impossible to equate ethics
with whatever society accepts. Some people accept the extra-judicial killings
of people involved in drugs, but others do not. If being ethical were doing
whatever society accepts, one would have to find an agreement on issues
which does not exist.

Finally, being ethical is not the same as doing "whatever society accepts." In
any society, most people accept standards that are, in fact, ethical. But
standards of behavior in society can deviate from what is ethical. An entire
society can become ethically corrupt.

Ethics and Values

There are several definitions about ethics and values, each more verbose
and vague than the other. For one, ethics is defined as "the science of the
morality of human acts and rational human behavior." Values, on the other
hand, have been ostentatiously described as a "qualitatively determined
behavior which has a normative obligatory character and presupposes the
liberty of possible decision."

To simplify further, ethics is the capacity to determine right conduct and the
knowledge of what is right from wrong. Values, on the other hand, are the
application of ethics. It must be stressed that these two concepts should
always be together, for an expert in ethics might not be necessarily a values-
oriented person, and vice-versa. It's one thing to know what's good or bad,
and another thing to apply what you know.

THE ORIGINS OF ETHICS

When did ethics begin and how did it originate? If one has in mind ethics
proper-i.e., the systematic study of what is morally right and wrong-it is clear
that ethics could have come into existence only when human beings started
to reflect on the best way to live. This reflective stage emerged long after
human societies had developed some morality, usually in the form of
customary standards of right and wrong conduct. The process of reflection
tended to arise from such customs, even if in the end it may have found
them wanting. Accordingly, ethics began with the introduction of the first
moral codes.

Virtually every human society has some form of myth to explain the origin of
morality. In the Louvre in Paris, there is a black Babylonian column with a
relief showing the sun god Shamash presenting the code of laws to
Hammurabi, known as the Code of Hammurabi, The Hebrew Bible (Old
Testament) account of God's giving the Ten Commandments to Moses on
Mount Sinai might be considered another example. In the dialogue
Protagoras by Plato, there is an avowedly mythical account of how Zeus took
pity on the hapless humans, who were physically no match for the other
beasts. To make up for these deficiencies, Zeus gave humans a moral sense
and the capacity for law and justice, so that they could live in larger
communities and cooperate.

There is some difficulty, already known to Plato, with the view that morality
was created by divine power. In his dialogue Euthyphro, Plato considered the
suggestion that it is divine approval that makes an action right. Plato pointed
out that, if this were the case, one could not say that the gods approve of
such actions because they are right. Why then do they approve of them? Is
their approval entirely arbitrary? Plato considered this impossible and so held
that there must be some standards of right or wrong that are independent of
the likes and dislikes of the gods. Modern philosophers have generally
accepted Plato's argument because the alternative implies that if, for
example, the gods had happened to approve of torturing children and to
disapprove of helping one's neighbors, then the torture would have been
good and neighborliness bad.

That morality should be invested with all the mystery and power of divine
origin is not surprising. Nothing else could provide such strong reasons for
accepting the moral law. By attributing a divine origin to morality, the
priesthood became its interpreter and guardian and thereby secured for itself
a power that it would not readily relinquish. This link between morality and
religion has been so firmly forged that it is still sometimes asserted that
there could be no morality without religion. According to this view, ethics is
not an independent field of study but rather a branch of theology.

The terms ethics and morality are closely related. It is now common to refer
to ethical judgments or to ethical principles where it once would have been
more accurate to speak of moral judgments or moral principles. These
applications are an extension of the meaning of ethics. In earlier usage, the
term referred not to morality itself but the field of study, or branch of inquiry
that has morality as its subject matter. In this sense, ethics is equivalent to
moral philosophy.

THE IMPORTANCE OF ETHICAL BEHAVIOR

For citizens, even for those with no aspirations in a career in law
enforcement, morality and integrity are important characteristics to
demonstrate. Human instinctively knows that it is good to be moral and act
with integrity, but by coming to an understanding of the reasons for morality
and integrity, a person will be motivated to champion such behavior. Among
the reasons to be moral and integral, regardless of occupation are to:

Make society better. When you help make society better, you are
rewarded with also making better own lives and the lives of your families and
friends. Without moral conduct, society would be a miserable place.

Treat everyone equally. Equality is a cornerstone of most Western

democracies, where all individuals are afforded the same rights. This is not
possible without the majority of citizens behaving morally.

Secure meaningful employment. Often employers will look at a person'

past behavior as a predictor of future behavior. Someone who has a history
of immoral behavior will have difficulty securing employment in a meaningful
job, as that person may not be trusted.

Succeed at business. If you are employed in an occupation in which there

you must rely on others, your moral conduct will determine the degree of
goodwill that you receive from others. Businesses that have a checkered
moral history are typically viewed with caution and are unlikely to attract
new customers through word of mouth, and therefore are unlikely to prosper.
This is especially the case where social media makes customer reviews
readily accessible.

Lessen stress. When you make immoral decisions, you tend to feel
uncomfortable and concerned about our decision making. Making the right
moral decision, or taking a principled perspective on an issue, reduces
stress.

Ethics is also important for those citizens who do not aspire to work in law
enforcement. Successful business leaders often say that treating people
morally is a very important aspect in obtaining success, A person's
reputation is of key importance for a business leader, and if a person's
reputation is damaged by poor ethical conduct, the business will also suffer.
The same is true in all walks of life. Where ethics are taken seriously, and
people strive to make ethical decisions and actions, personal and
professional success follow.

ETHICS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT

The police are essential to democracy. By ensuring that no person is above

the law, the police protect citizens from victimization. Through the
enforcement of the law, police ensure that no individual or group violently
assert its will over public order

ETHICAL ROLE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS

The ethical role is performed by being objective and ethical in personal

behavior and in functioning as a representative of the criminal justice
system. The police officers are representatives of the criminal justice system
even when not in the performance of their duties. Therefore, they must
observe the following;

• To act in a manner that reflects the belief in the fundamental value of

ethical behavior and application of this value to their job.

• To conduct daily activities in an objective manner striving to be

uninfluenced by emotion, personal prejudice, or insufficient evidence.

• To provide objective and constructive assistance or information to all

persons, regardless of personal feelings.
• To assist the public to understand how they can help in achieving objective
and ethical behavior.

Ethics and the Pursuit of a Law Enforcement Career

Without a doubt, the most important attributes of an individual applying for a

job in law enforcement are the applicant's integrity and moral behavior. To be
a law enforcement officer, individuality and demonstrate a life lived morally.

Of course, in some instances, an applicant may have on occasion been

involved in isolated immoral activities. This is often Understandable;
however, law enforcement employers will not hire an applicant if they detect
a demonstrated pattern of immoral behavior. Recruiters and the agencies
they work for may differ in the specific number of illegal or immoral acts they
will allow an applicant to have committed before hiring that person, they all
agree that it is very few. Some law enforcement agencies, in hiring clients
where they have numerous applicants to consider, can be very selective and
may choose only those applicants who have not demonstrated any moral
lapses.

The moral history of an applicant is closely scrutinized by law enforcement

agencies through background checks, polygraphs, detailed interviews, and
integrity questionnaires. Each of these methods is used to root out applicants
who may have exhibited poor moral choices in their past. Right or wrong, law
enforcement agencies view past performance as a predictor of future moral
performance.

Predicting an applicant's future moral conduct is largely based on the

common acceptance of the Slippery Slope Theory (Punch, 2009).
According to this theory, applicants who exhibit minor moral infractions are
viewed as likely to progress to more serious immoral behavior. The theory
describes a small deviant acts that will become increasingly easy and lead to
participation in larger, more serious acts. These small acts are "ladder" in
which corruption is the result, after a series of immoral steps.
In this theory, it also describes the journey of some police officers as they
travel from being moral civilians to immoral police officers. This often occurs
because indoctrination into the police culture can negatively affect police
recruits' ethical behavior and have disastrous consequences. In describing
this journey into the police subculture, it states that the result is the slippery
slope during which immoral decisions start as minor breaches of
organizational or occupational rules and evolve into major corruption.
Accordingly, even those applicants who have taken part in minor immoral
activities would likely progress to serious immoral behaviors.

The slippery slope theory also proposes that corrupt individuals who have
entered law enforcement are more likely to engage in the future criminal
activity whether they have that first free cup of coffee or not. It is therefore
suggested that if only a few officers slide into immoral behavior as a result of
receiving a gratuity, then all officers should be denied such opportunities.
Police corruption is so severe that it should be prevented at all levels, even if
this means banning all gratuities.

As Employees in Law Enforcement Agencies

Inevitably this question arises: "why is it so important to be a moral law

enforcement officer?" There are several reasons why people employed in law
enforcement are required to be moral and to have sound moral values.
Ironically, morals can at times be a hard sell to law enforcement officers,
who, when dealing with exigent situations in which they are concerned not
only for their safety but for the safety of all citizens, consider that the
manner or means of how safety is achieved is not as important as the result
of achieving that safety. In other words, officers who are dealing with their
safety as well as the safety of others may consider the notion of
philosophizing about the right thing to do as not being overly important.

However, law enforcement careers come with several duties and

responsibilities for which moral behavior is mandatory. The primary ones
include discretion, power, and public service.
• Discretion. Discretion in law enforcement is necessary to efficiently
manage call loads and to mediate minor incidents. Law enforcement
personnel have enormous discretionary power throughout every rank,
regardless of seniority, and are given great freedom to make operational
decisions from the moment they start on the job. Discretion in law
enforcement includes whom to arrest, whom to investigate, who talk to, and
whom to interview. More importantly, in these decisions officers have the
power to deprive people of their freedom. It is critical that law enforcement
officials possess moral character so that the enormous decisions they must
make are balanced and fair.

• Power. Because law enforcement officers exercise much discretion, they

also wield great power. They have the power to arrest, detain, search, seize,
and question. The government grants officers these powers so they can
enforce laws and maintain peace. People live in a country in which due
process protects civilians from the abuse of government agents and in which
certain freedoms are expected. Thus, law enforcement officers are expected
to use their discretion with due process in mind.

• Public service. The state employs law enforcement officers to carry out
the state's mandate: enforcing the law and keeping the peace. The trust the
state places in law enforcement and other public officials to carry out this
duty in a responsible fashion is called public trust. Public trust ensures that
those tasked with these duties will not abuse their power. Public trust also
ensures that all public officials will be held to a higher standard than those
they serve. The ultimate test of public trust is that law enforcement officials
"walk the talk" or "practice what they preach," and that they never engage in
behavior that, if performed by others, would be considered to break the law.

MAJOR ETHICAL SYSTEMS

When learning how to resolve ethical dilemmas, it is important to be able

to articulate a justifiable rationale for why you believe one decision seems
right and another seems wrong. Having a basic understanding of the major
ethical theories will help you toward an ethical resolution learning how to
articulate and justify the decision.

At times, some of the ethical theories may seem overly philosophical for your
purposes; you may even wonder why you should study theories that were
sometimes developed centuries ago when you are primarily dealing with
present-day issues. In other instances, some of the ethical theories may
seem overbearing. The theories you look at here, however, are important to
help us understand why the decisions we make, or someone else makes, are
ethical or unethical.

For example, a decision may be made that appears on the surface to be

unethical, but when you are aware of the philosophical system used in the
decision making, you can then understand the root of the decision and, at
the very least, see its intended morality. This allows you to view ethical
issues from different perspectives and assists you in making informed
decisions.

CATEGORIES OF ETHICAL THEORIES

1. Normative Theory

Describe not only what ought to be done, but also why things should be done
that in some instances may appear counterintuitive to what is considered as
an ethical decision would be. Such a theory is often called an ethical system
because it provides a system that allows people to determine ethical actions
that individuals should take.

2. Meta-ethics Theory

This theory does not address how a person should behave; rather, meta-
ethics is related more to the study of the ethical theory itself. Here the
interest is in evaluating moral and ethical theories and systems. For
example, moral relativism is a meta-ethical theory because it interprets
discussions around ethics; a question asked within moral relativism is "is
ethics culturally relative?" It is further defines as "a discipline that
investigates the meaning of ethical systems and whether they are relative or
are universal, and are self-constructed or are independent of human
creation."

3. Applied Ethics Theory

It describes the application of normative theories to specific issues, usually

related to work or belonging to an organization; for example, policies and
procedures of organizations or ethical codes of mafia versus ethical codes of
police officers. Applied ethics is defined as "theories of ethics concerned with
the application of normative ethics to particular ethical issues." An example
is knowing and practicing the Philippine National Police Ethical Standards as
a police officer.

Types of Normative Ethical Theory

With the overview of the three categories of ethical theories, the Normative
Ethical Theory will be further analyzed.

1. Utilitarian Ethics

Utilitarian ethics is a normative ethical system that is primarily concerned

with the consequences of ethical decisions; therefore it can be described as a
teleological theory or consequentialist theory, which are essentially
the same thing, both having a notion that the consequence of the act is the
most important determinant of the act being moral or not. Teleological
reasoning takes into consideration that the ethical decision is dependent
upon the consequences ("ends") of the actions. In teleological reasoning, a
person will do the right thing if the consequences of his or her actions are
good. Additionally, if an action by a person was an act that was "not good,"
but the consequences turned out to be "good," under some theories of
teleological reasoning, the act may be deemed a good ethical act.

As a result, of the consequentialist nature of utilitarianism, the means to get

to the ethical decision ("end") are secondary; the result is that which must be
considered before determining the morality of the decision.
Importance of Utilitarian Theory in Law Enforcement Moral
Dilemmas

Law enforcement officers possess a great deal of discretion that must be

exercised by all officers of every rank, regardless of their experience. When
exercising this discretion, officers will be confronted daily with issues that are
complex, and may not be covered in the agency's policy and most certainly
would not have been covered in their formal education or police academy or
other training. Law enforcement officers also are required to make exigent
decisions, without the ability to consult with senior officers or policy and
procedures. In some instances, when confronted with decisions, officers may
want to rely on utilitarianism to make an ethical decision that is defensible
when scrutinized in the future.

2. Deontology

Probably the most complex of all the ethical systems is the deontological
theory. The word deontology comes from the Greek word deon, meaning
"obligation" or "duty." It is an ethical system primarily concerned with one's
duty.

The notion of duty is important to law enforcement officers who are bound by
law to perform their duty. A duty is something that is required to be
executed, regardless of whether the police officer wants or not. The duty
may have a personal or professional negative consequence attached to it,
but as it is a requirement or obligation, it is absolute and imperative.

Importance of Deontological Theory in Law Enforcement Moral

Dilemmas

Law enforcement officers are required at times to fulfill their duty no matter
what the personal costs. When confronted with a duty that they may not
want to perform, the officers should consider that they agreed to perform
duties when they swore their oath. These duties must be performed by
someone, and when this duty falls to them, they must do their duty. For
example, a Highway Patrol Group officer who does not want to issue a
citation ticket to a person who introduced himself as another police officer
must consider his duty and the oath that he took when he joined the
Philippine National Police. The caveat to duty is that the duty must be done
in good faith; that is, the task should not be performed if the officer is aware
that there is a lack of morality in the duty. It is often said among experienced
police officers, "you are paid not for what you do, but for what you might
have to do." This maxim refers to the dangerous duty that you may not want
to do, but are paid to do, and ought to do.

3. Virtue Ethics

Virtue ethics has its historical background in ancient Greece and was
primarily developed by Aristotle. For law enforcement, the major foundation
in virtue ethics is the idea that if you are a good person, you will do good
things, and to be good, you must do well. In essence, you do not do good
things because of an analysis of the result or of an equation to decide how
many people to help versus harm. Instead, you do the right thing, or good
thing, because of your good character as demonstrated throughout your life.
Therefore, the good act is an automatic response requiring little thought.
However, when faced with complex ethical dilemmas, the person who has
demonstrated a life of good character will show good character, using
temperance and intellect.

Importance of Virtue Ethics Assist in Law Enforcement Moral

Dilemmas

Law enforcement agencies place a great emphasis on the good behavior of

their officers. One way to ensure a strong likelihood of good behavior is to
hire those who have a moral character that reflects the values of the
organization. In clearly identifying these characteristics, agencies are likely
to attract those who also identify with these characteristics.

Importance of Ethics of Care Theory in Law Enforcement Moral

Dilemmas
Building rapport with members of the community is an important aspect of
community policing. This enables officers to identify issues and to deal with
them with compassion. For example, an officer who builds rapport with
tricycle drivers may become aware of people who are involved in illegal
drugs. It is with compassion that the officer will be pushed to action to
resolve this issue. Or an officer who is called to a convenience store to arrest
a mentally ill street person who is stealing food may, instead of arresting the
suspect, find an alternative route, such as connecting the person with a
social service agency, or arranging for a social worker to help the person find
a home.

Law enforcement officers should attempt, where possible, to address such

issues with compassion and respect for all the parties involved.

1. Virtue ethics, at its core, is also simplistic, having two tenets that are
important for law enforcement. There is no need to measure consequences
or the morality of the action. Simply, the task is to be good and do good acts.
If officers are good, they will act in a virtuous manner.

2. There is a need to practice virtue. By practicing being virtuous, you will

become virtuous in difficult situations automatically. Given this view, it is
critical for law enforcement agencies to ensure that applicants wanting to
join the agency have practiced being virtuous to the point where it has
become a habit. Applicants who have practiced the virtues listed above will
be officers who demonstrate those virtues by habit.

4. Ethics of Care

Also known as feminist ethics, ethics of care is primarily concerned with

caring for others. This has evolved from the need to care for those who
cannot care for themselves, such as infants. It is a system that assists your
relations with other people and thereby strengthens how you positively
interact with people. The concept of ethics of care is consistent with many
peace-keeping and peace-making roles within law enforcement. Officers
routinely find themselves refereeing non-assault domestic and civil
arguments while attempting to bring a peaceful resolution to the conflict.
Ethics of care is, at times, an important perspective for law enforcement
officers when they see a person in need and decide to perform an act of care
or kindness. Officers who perform a caring act are, according to ethics of
care, acting out of compassion rather from a sense of duty; it is within this
context that ethics of care can be a reminder to law enforcement officers
that often an ethical solution may be to make peace through consensus and
understanding, rather than resolve issues formally through charges.

Ethics of care also supports the notion that issues should be resolved with
compassion while building human relationships. In this way, a person should
strive to build relationships with the community or individuals. With
individuals, the building of rapport is critical to providing compassion to
those in crisis and need.

5. Egoism

Unlike other theories that prescribe how you ought to behave, egoism is a
descriptive principle that does not tell you necessarily how you ought to
behave, but rather why you behave the way you do. It infers that the person
who acts in an egotistical manner does so because it is natural to act in this
way, and therefore it is a moral action unto itself.

According to the tenets of egoism, the core reason that someone does any
action is self-serving by bringing happiness or some other benefit to him- or
herself. If someone performs an action that appears to be altruistic, the
action was likely performed to give the actor gratification in some way. This
may come in many forms; for example in the form of positive media
attention, or just feeling good about oneself.

Importance of Egoism in Law Enforcement in Moral Dilemmas

Egoism does not suggest that police officers should act in their self- interest;
certainly, this would not be appropriate for law enforcement personnel.
Where egoism may help is to better understand why people do things that
may appear selfish. This may help them develop empathy for the suspects
that appear to be selfish and allow them to better understand that their
actions are driven by egoism. Egoism may also assist them in understanding
the motives of others, allowing them to look at these motives with more
skeptically than we would otherwise.

Egoism can also provide explanations of misconduct among law enforcement

officers. Officers who abuse the trust placed on them by society and abuse
their authority could be said to be acting in an egoistic state.

6. Religion or Divine Command Theory

Religion is often considered the most widely used system to make ethical
decisions and to conduct moral reasoning. Throughout the world, people rely
on a variety of religions to help them determine the most ethical action to
take. While divine command theory is widely used throughout the world,
there are differences: the application of the theory may differ from religion to
religion, and it may differ within each religion.

One of the basic tenets for divine command theory is to use God as the
source for all principles. In this way, to rely upon divine command theory, a
person must believe that there is a willful and rational god that has provided
the direction toward an ethical outcome. It is from God's commands that
actions are determined to be right or wrong and, because of this, divine
command theory provides an objective assessment of what is ethical or
moral. However, there is ambiguity in the way in which some scripture is
interpreted.

Importance of Divine Command Theory in Law Enforcement Moral

Dilemmas

Generally, for officers who believe in God, a source of comfort may be

present when facing death or other traumatic events that non- believers may
not experience. Officers dealing with death may find comfort in the belief
that those who die may be in a better place that their soul is eternal and that
death may mean that the soul goes to heaven. Believing that death is not
the end, but a new beginning may help officers who practice religion deal
with pain and suffering.

Officers are routinely involved in circumstances in which situations appear to

be unfair and where innocent bystanders are victimized with tragic
outcomes. Officers who believe in God are also able to look at these
situations and find comfort in the belief that God has a plan for everyone,
even those who have been unfairly victimized. These officers can draw
strength from their belief that the random victimization wasn't so random
and that God was acting in a way that, while hard to explain, is planned for
some reason only known to God.

Specifically, divine command theory can offer officers a written or prescribed

direction to morality. Officers who are faced with a situation in which their
values clash with society may fall back on divine command theory for
direction in grey areas. An officer who is surrounded with unethical activity
by officers, other criminal justice workers, and people on the street may be
able to withstand pressure to join in the immoral practice with the belief that
God commands moral behavior toward everyone and prohibits such things as
theft through corruption.

Officers could also use divine command theory to reaffirm in their minds
what is right, even when the Criminal Code or other legislation is unclear on
a particular issue. By officers asking themselves what would God command
or prohibit, they may be able to make a decision that they can justify.

Finally, officers who believe that God is always good would, therefore, believe
that all of God's commands and prohibitions are good. By interpreting
scripture, following the directions of religious authority, or making individual
interpretations of God's command and prohibitions, officers are therefore
able to do good, understanding that ultimately it is God's commands that
they follow, and therefore their actions are good.

7. Natural Law
Natural law was espoused by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who viewed the world
as being created by God and understood that humans are rational beings
capable of using their intellect to comprehend the world. By extension, God
enabled humans to reason naturally to make ethical choices. Aquinas viewed
the first principle of natural law as: "good is to be done and promoted, and
evil is to be avoided." Simply put, natural law asserts that what is good is
natural, and what is natural is good.

Importance of Natural Law in Law Enforcement in Moral Dilemmas

Natural law can reaffirm in officers the importance of their job, that being to
preserve their own life and the human species. Officers could be reminded
that property is not as important as life and that their sole function should be
public safety, rather than the protection of property, which is one of the
common law duties of police officers.

Officers could also use natural law as a reminder of the importance to

preserve their own lives when confronted with dangerous situations and that
is natural to want to protect oneself.

8. Social Contract Theory

Social contract theory is another descriptive theory about society and the
relationship between rules and laws, and why society needs them.
Accordingly, a society without rules and laws to govern actions would be a
dreadful place to live. In such a state, people would act on their own accord,
without any responsibility to their community.

Importance of Social Contract Theory in Law Enforcement in Moral

Dilemmas

While social contract theory does not tell people how they ought to behave,
it does provide a basis to understand why society has implemented rules,
regulations, and laws. If not for the social contract theory, our understanding
of the need for these rules would be limited.

Specifically for law enforcement, social contract theory is important to justify

the power that law enforcement can exert over the population as a whole.
The power imbalance, held by law enforcement, is part of the contract that
society has agreed upon in exchange for security. Where the contract can be
problematic is when the power used by law enforcement exceeds what is
expected by the society under the contract.

9. Rawls' Theory of Justice

John Rawls (1921-2002) was a contemporary philosopher who studied

theories surrounding justice. His theories are not focused on helping
individuals cope with ethical dilemmas; rather they address general concepts
that consider how the criminal justice system ought to behave and function
in a liberal democracy. It is for this reason that it important that all law
enforcement personnel be aware of Rawls' theories of justice or at least have
a general understanding of the major concepts that he puts forth.

1. Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic

liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others.

2. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are

both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage (b)
attached to positions and offices open to all.

These principles should be adhered to, according to Rawls, to ensure

that disadvantages are neutralized and everyone receives the same
benefits of justice. Rawls further addresses ethics in the individual,
though this is not the central tenet of his theory, and is somewhat of a
general statement of how moral people should behave.

MODERN ETHICAL ISSUES IN LAW ENFORCEMENT

Five modern ethical issues in law enforcement involve the officer's off-
duty life, upholding the law and your rights, using necessary force, and
acting impartially.

Off-Duty Life

Police officers are held to an extremely high standard that requires

their personal lives to reflect the integrity of their position. They must
maintain a professional image at all times because they are under
constant public scrutiny and rely on the public's trust to maintain their
power position. While most jobs end when the individual clocks out,
policeman are faced with the ethical issues of maintaining their level of
social respect and adherence to the law every moment. This often puts
them in direct conflict with society, especially those that have little
respect for the law or the badge.

Upholding the Law and the Citizen's Rights

Each officer swears an oath to uphold the law and to defend an

individual's constitutional rights. One of the ethical issues that an
officer faces daily is the ability to uphold these oaths when they are
seemingly contradictory. One of the biggest contradictions can be
found in the present government drug wars, which force police officers
to act in the best interest of the state rather than the individual. When
someone is caught using or peddling illegal drugs, they could be
arrested or shot to death because they are "nan laban" to the arresting
police officers. A cop, sometimes, cannot consider the right to life and
liberty issues because they are under instruction to put an end to drug
menace at all costs.

Necessary Force

All police officers have the authority to use necessary force to uphold
the law, but in some cases their use of force is unjustified. This ethical
issue cops face each day can, and does, put their lives in danger when
dealing with those individuals that are non-compliant. In the majority of
cases, an officer must make a split-second decision on what level of
force is necessary, and a misjudgment could result in injury or death
for the officer. Research about obedience to authority proved that a
person's perception of losing his freedoms would provoke him to react
and officers can easily be coerced in high-stress environments to use
unnecessary force.

Acting Impartially

One of the ethical issues officers are faced with is the requirement to
act impartially. This idealistic type of oath causes a host of problems in
real-world situations. It's not always possible to act impartially,
especially for local officers that handle the same crowds of people
throughout their career. A real-world example of this would be an
officer that knows where the drug lords houses are but has no court-
acceptable evidence to pursue the case. The officer is expected to
follow law enforcement ethics, but he is also limited in his authority to
uphold the law by following certain procedures. He therefore
sometimes resort to unethical ways to arrest the drug lords.

ETHICAL DILEMMAS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT

When are confronted with a problem or an issue for which a police

officer is required to make a difficult decision, he faces a dilemma. The
decision may be difficult because there are at least two competing
values to choose between. For example, you are confronted by a
situation where the traffic violator introduced himself as a ranking
government official. You have to decide between issuing a traffic
citation ticket and letting go of the violation. Knowing the big egos of
most government officials in the Philippines, your decision will involve
considering the consequences of your action. Issue him a ticket, and
you may be placed in hot water or just do nothing and accept that it is
a norm among people in the government. The decision is often difficult,
and sometimes you make the wrong decision with the best of
intentions of making the right decision.

To solve ethical dilemmas, you must be aware of what values you

consider important. Values are defined as unverifiable "elements of
desirability, worth, and importance." They are unverifiable because
they are not capable of being scientifically proven and may vary from
person to person.
 Solving Ethical Dilemmas

With values as the focal point, the following framework includes six
steps to help address ethical dilemmas in general;

1. Determine whether there is an ethical issue or/and dilemma. Is there

a conflict of values, or rights, or professional responsibilities?

2. Identify the key values and principles involved. What meanings and
limitations are typically attached to these competing values?

3. Rank the values or ethical principles which in your professional

judgment - are most relevant to the issue or dilemma. What reasons
can you provide for prioritizing one competing value/principle over
another?

4. Develop an action plan that is consistent with the ethical priorities

that have been determined as central to the dilemma. Have you
conferred with clients and colleagues, as appropriate, about the
potential risks and consequences of alternative courses of action? Can
you support or justify your action plan with the values/ principles on
which the plan is based?

5. Implement your plan, utilizing the most appropriate practice skills

and competencies. How will you make use of core social work skills
such as sensitive communication, skillful negotiation, and cultural
competence?

6. Reflect on the outcome of this ethical decision-making process. How

would you evaluate the consequences of this process for those
involved: client(s), professional(s), and organization(s)?

10 STEPS TO MAKE ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING EFFICIENT AND

PRACTICAL
This framework is specific to law enforcement officers and addresses the
consideration of laws, regulations, policy, and procedures that other
frameworks assume will be followed, but in law enforcement are very
important to avoid charges and allow cases against suspects to proceed.

1. Establish the facts surrounding the ethical dilemma Facts are

important in law enforcement. To investigate all cases, officers must rely on
facts to guard against misinformation and cognitive biases. If the facts are
not known, everything that surrounds the dilemma must be investigated to
act on the right information. Avoid acting on rumors and gossip by verifying
information through factual information and evidence.

2. Determine your legal obligations and duties. Be sure of your

professional and legal obligations. Professional and legal obligations will
likely allow you to easily decide on a course of action to take in an ethical
dilemma. However, while professional and legal obligations may not always
require a course of action that coincides with these obligations, your
awareness of any professional and legal obligations must be known to allow
you to be fully cognizant of the consequences of your actions should you
choose to ignore professional or legal obligations.

3. Establish the interested participants involved. It is important to

know who will be impacted by the course of action that you decide upon.
Often the primary participants are easy to identify, and it is the secondary
participants that are often not considered. These may include friends,
families, or employees that are related somehow to the primary participants
in the ethical dilemma. Knowing the impact of the decision made to
secondary participants may be particularly important for a decision made
with utilitarian underpinnings; where the rights of those who are not part of
the majority may not be considered.

4. Determine the ethical values of each participant. Determining

ethical values is important to allow you an understanding of what is truly at
stake. A participant in an ethical dilemma may value loyalty as the most
important value. However, another participant may value equality as the
more important value. When considered, the value of loyalty may not
compare with equality, depending upon the ethical dilemma.

5. Consider normative ethical theories as an aide to determine a

course of action. When considering options, normative ethical theories
may assist you in determining the consequences of actions, or the duties you
may be obligated to follow that fall outside of the laws, rules, and
procedures. You may also assess whether the decision you are considering is
rational from another perspective you have not considered.

6. Consider options that would be ethically sound. There may be

several options to consider, and each option ought to be considered critically
by determining what harm it would cause and what values the person being
harmed holds. The participant should consider the positives and negatives of
the decision and determine the risks and benefits associated with each
option, as well as the benefits of each action, with these values in mind.

7. Consideration of the possible negative and positive outcomes of

each possible option. Try to predict what may otherwise be unintended
consequences of your decision. These consequences may not be readily
apparent, but they require a critical analysis of the consequences of your
decision. To help with this, try asking the following questions:

• Would the action taken be well received if it was on the front page of a
newspaper or headline of a television? While this should be a consideration,
keep in mind that often the right decision may be the least popular in public
opinion.

• If the decision is job-related, would the organization you work for

commends you if it knew you would make this decision? If the answer is yes,
then this should give weight to the decision you are about to make.

• If the decision is not job-related, would the organization you would like to
work for still commends you if it knew all the facts surrounding the dilemma
and the decision you would make? If the answer is yes, then this should give
weight to the decision you are about to make.

ETHICS OF GRATUITIES

For discussion surrounding ethics in law enforcement, a gratuity is the gift

of an item to another person based solely on their occupation. A gratuity is
most often given to officers by businessmen, politicians, government
employees, public utility vehicle drivers, waiters, and any other persons.
Additionally, and problematically, gratuities are given for services expected
and services already rendered; free meals for law enforcement officers often
come with strings attached, or at the very least, as an insurance policy to
gain favors in the future should the need arise. A cynic would argue that
offering free meals is not an altruistic gesture, but rather an insurance policy
for security in the future. A law enforcement officer who receives free meals
from a restaurateur will likely be expected to provide extra service to the
restaurant should it be required.

Conversely, a law enforcement officer who removes a drunk person from a

restaurant can often expect a free meal after the drunk has been removed.
Four main reasons that gratuities are given to law enforcement officers are:

1. Because of the Theory of Reciprocity, where people feel they owe

something to the giver. In a law enforcement context, this will be collected
after the gift is given.

2. To ensure future cooperation, where the gift-giver may want the services
of the officer in the future. This can include gaining biased support of officers
in spite of the facts surrounding an issue.

3. To use the presence of police officers, attracted by free meals, as an

advertisement to potential patrons that the environment is safe.
4. To use the presence of police officers, attracted by free meals, as a way to
dissuade potentially problematic patrons from patronizing the restaurant.

Gratuities are often seen as the first step on the slippery slope toward major
corruption and it is for this reason that accepting gratuities is always frowned
upon by some law enforcement agencies. It is argued that while each step is,
on the slippery slope, individually insignificant, it is the cumulative effect of
the steps that draw and pushes officers to more serious forms of unethical
behaviors. Once an officer starts on the slippery slope, once step leads to
another: the meal leads to another meal, which eventually leads to a free
meal to the friends or families of the officer. The cumulative effect of these
gratuities leads to a situation that is difficult for the officer to stop doing or
turn around.

While other professions, such as doctors, are free to receive gratuities, law
enforcement officers must be careful when receiving gratuities for the
following reasons:

• Police are professionals and professionals don't take gratuities.

• People will expect different treatment.

• Gratuities could erode public confidence.

• There is the slippery slope potential; the receipt of gratuities can be a

gateway for more corruption.

Further discussions on gratuities as applied in the Philippine National Police

organization is presented in Chapter 4 of this book.

ATTRIBUTES OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL

In a law enforcement context, society has expectations of officers. The

virtues listed below are attractive to law enforcement agencies, and people
who demonstrate these virtues are those who law enforcement agencies
want.

Courageous. Officers who are willing to put themselves in harm's way, to

enforce the law, to protect people and property and to prevent crime.

Perseverance. Officers who are not easily deterred from doing the right
thing or investigating crimes.

Compassion. Officers who can empathize and sympathize with

lawbreakers and victims and who understand that situations are complex
and that everyone deserves respect.

Generosity. Officers who offer themselves off duty by volunteering and

who try to better the lives of others through community service.

Truthfulness. Officers who are trustworthy and who can be counted on to

speak the truth, even when the truth is embarrassing, or results in a not-
guilty decision in a case that is important to the officer.

Good Temper. Officers who, when confronted with difficult situations, stay
calm and who can withstand pressure to react physically or verbally.

CORE VIRTUES OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL

Prudence. Officers with the ability to decide the correct action to take
when rules and policy are not present.

Trust. Officers with the ability to be relied upon for truth. This must exist
between officers and civilians, officers themselves, and officers and the
courts.
Effacement of self-interests. Officers who do not abuse their position of
authority or gain favoritisms due to their position.

Courage. Officers who place themselves in danger intellectually and

physically. Officers who are not afraid of testifying in court and making
arrests in tense and intimidating settings.

Intellectual honesty. Officers who act while weighing what they learned
in training and whose actions reflect their training and their academic
abilities.

Justice. Officers who treat everyone fairly, regardless of personal biases,

and who act toward individuals as if looking through a veil of neutrality.

Responsibility. Officers who understand what is right and that there are
other courses of actions, but have the intent to do right. Officers who can be
counted upon to keep oaths, and to be accountable.

SIX PILLARS OF CHARACTER OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL

The six pillars identified as being the most important characteristics of an

ethical police officer are:

1. Trustworthiness. Includes integrity, promise-keeping, and loyalty.

2. Respect. Treating everyone with respect, regardless of any biases or

provocations.
3. Responsibility. Includes accountability, the pursuit of excellence, and
self-restraint.

4. Justice and fairness. Includes equity and demonstrating due process.

5. Caring. Showing concern for others. Showing consideration for decisions

that affect others.

6. Civic virtue and citizenship. P Being socially conscious and

demonstrating concern for one's community.

LAW ENFORCEMENT CODE OF ETHICS

The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) adopted the

universally accepted Code of Ethics for Law Enforcement as a guideline to
ethical behavior of its police professionals.

As a Law Enforcement Officer, my fundamental duty is to serve mankind;

to safeguard lives and property; to 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.

I will keep my private life unsullied as an example to all; maintain

courageous calm in the face of danger, scorn, or ridicule; develop self-
restraint, and be constantly mindful of the welfare of others. Honest in
thought and deed in both my personal and official life, I will be exemplary in
obeying the laws of the land and the regulations of my department.
Whatever I see or hear of a confidential nature or that is confided to me in
my official capacity will be kept ever secret unless revelation is necessary for
the performance of my duty.
I will never act officiously or permit personal feelings, prejudices,
animosities or friendships to influence my decisions. With no compromise for
crime and with relentless prosecution of criminals, I will enforce the law
courteously and appropriately without fear or favor, malice or ill will, never
employing unnecessary force or violence and never accepting gratuities.

I recognize the badge of my office as a symbol of public faith, and 1

accepts it as a public trust to be held so long as I am true to the ethics of the
police service I will constantly strive to achieve these objectives and ideals,
dedicating myself before God to my chosen profession law enforcement.