What are the police for? ‘You do as much as you can, within what is possible.’

The police may use the knowledge it possesses more and act more confidently, concludes associate professor of Public Administration Dorian Schaap. Commissioned by the Chief of Police, he researched a fundamental issue: what are the police for? He spoke to people inside and outside the organisation. ‘Taking tasks away from them doesn't work.’

When you talk about the police, everyone knows who you mean and everyone also has a feeling about it. There is no other public organisation that captures the imagination so much. ‘The police are the most visible part of government authority,’ says public administration expert Dorian Schaap. ‘They make the difference between life and death.’ But what exactly they do and what role they play in society is more difficult to establish. 

A new story 

As an organisation, the police are looking for a new story. This is partly because the previous justice and security minister had a new outlook on police duties. 'Yeşilgöz considered divesting smaller work, such as enforcement and surveillance, and focusing on more serious crime. The police are also struggling with the many tasks, but do not want to lose part of their domain without thinking it through themselves.'

On top of that, the organisation is facing more and more questions. For instance, there are opposing wishes in society. 'On the one hand, the police must be nearby, close to the people. On the other hand, they must also take a detached position, to be neutral and maintain an overview. How do you do that?' 

Technological innovations are also changing the work. 'To solve cases, officers hardly use interrogations anymore. It is now mainly about tapping phone calls and cracking chat servers. But as is true for the entire government: changes are happening faster than they can keep up with.'

Dorian Schaap FM FM Focus

Physical coercion and knowledge 

For the study, Schaap, together with colleagues Hester Paanakker and Johan de Kruijf, used interviews, focus groups and literature. In this way, he looked at what makes the police unique. 'Actually, the organisation rests on two pillars. The first is generic physical coercion. That means the police can use physical coercion in any situation where it might be needed.' The second pillar is the consequence of the first: police officers know a lot through their work. 'The police are involved in neighbour quarrels, radicalisation, unrest in football stadiums and so on. As a result, they have an incredibly broad perspective on social problems. They have in-house knowledge that other organisations don't have.'

‘No docile dogs’ 

Schaap concludes that the police can use this knowledge more and act more confidently. 'Within the organisation, people often complain about the lack of capacity, but you can also see that as a framework. You do as much as you can, within what is possible.' Schaap calls that a harsh but hopeful message. 'At football matches, the police do not have to say: you ask, we turn. Nor: because of the shortage, we are present here and not there. Instead, the police can use their knowledge of public order to discuss other possibilities, such as the deployment of stewards and crowd control.' The police can take a stand in this, Schaap argues. 'We also got that back from administrators. They see that the police have knowledge they do not possess. One mayor said: ‘we don't need docile dogs’.

Pride 

Focus groups included looking at how officers themselves see their work. In this, Schaap discovered a paradox. 'Police officers think they have to do too many tasks that do not belong to their job. But if you ask when they are proud of their work, they say, for example: when I comforted a child after a car accident in which the parents were seriously injured. That has nothing to do with crime. They want fewer tasks, but also value the breadth of work.'

As such, he thinks shirking duties will not work. Police are not simply replaceable or divisible. 'You don't know in advance whether the deployment of police is needed. If you take them away from reports of confused behaviour, for example, they still have to come when things have escalated.'

Taking over words 

The study was well received by the police. The organisation drew up an internal vision document, adopting several aspects from the study by Schaap and his colleagues. 'The chief of police wrote in this document about “generic coercive competence”. That's the best thing, when they adopt your words without referring to you.'

Contact information