Diverse individual weaknesses of police officers and structural deficiences within the police force have been analysed throughout this booklet. Furthermore, suggestions for reform have been presented, which Human Rights Organisations, Leftist Parties and other organisations hope will prevent violation of justice in the future. However, with the shockingly high number of violations and the way in which violation is dealt with, the question has to be asked whether the cause of violation is down to individual and structural deficiences within the police force alone or if the causes lie elsewhere.
Many questions still remain unanswered and the conditions which enable violation of justice to take place – that is from police officers being protected by their colleagues, violation being made to seem harmless through politics, to Public Prosecution and Law not carrying out convictions – are presented haphazardly. Question which relate in particular to why thugs in uniform almost never need to fear a disiplinary hearing or a legal penalty and the encouragement of violations through certain laws, can only be answered inadequately.
With the observation of racism in the police force and racially motivated violation it is thought that the explanation for violation of justice – that it only lies within individual and structural deficiencies – is not conclusive. However, it seems that violation does not just randomly occur but concerns a – “legal” – order, which is the police force against immigrants. The direct link to violation clearly appeared with “suspicious” supervision – that is, legal harassment and illegal violence. How should violation be explained if not by the incompetence of police officers?
The understanding of what police violation represents becomes clearer when it is viewed in the context of Governmental Repression. The idea of repression can be comprehended as the governmental procedure against social groups and movements which find themselves, whether consciously or unconciously, in conflict with the governing order. The goal of Governmental Repression is to weaken and break-up these groups. This is mainly done by the protection of the constitution, the police force and judiciary. In this context the police force only represent a facet of Governmental Repression and the police force use both legal and illegal means of maintaining law and order. This becomes clearer when it can be seen in a concrete example:
Politically active people in particular have experienced first-hand violations by the police force during demonstrations. Police officers who provoke people are unfortunately frequently the rule rather than the exception at demonstrations where the protest of a social and/or political movement does not remain symbolic but actually materialises in conflicts with politics in the form of conflicts with the police force. The interrelationship between police violation of justice and other forms of repression is especially clear in this context by the police officers feeling of duty to closely observe demonstrators which frequently serves as a motive for violation against demonstrators.
Whether it is allegations against leftists, who are remanded for a few months virtually leading to a penalty before the actually conviction - like in the case of Julia S. from Potsdam who was remanded in custody for over 5 months with the charge of attempted murder because a Nazi received a few scratches; or the disintegration of a party linked to the personal identification of all guests and the searching of lots of office rooms and flats (partially without a search warrant), in the run-up to the Bundestag elections in 2005 because there was an announcement that, right-winged extremists (NPD) were able to exchanged placards that they had brought along with them for free cocktails: all of these forms of Governmental Repression have the aim of intimidating participants and sympathisers of social movements, closely observing movements, prohibiting anti-repression work and therefore weakening and breaking-up movements.
It quickly becomes clear that in some racially motivated attacks there is an interlocking of illegal and legal forms of repression. Violation is nearly always preceded by harassment and discrimination and also legal “unsuspicious” supervision. The rules for residency are monitored and asylum seekers are forbidden to leave the administrative district where they have received their residence permit unless they have permission, therefore considerably reducing their freedom of movement. The various other specialised laws for refugees and immigrants are also directly linked to police violation and have the same aim, to make residency in Germany as difficult as possible, with the goal of a “voluntary” deportation. At the same time racially motivated violation is seen in the context of protests and resistance from the point of view of the refugees and immigrants. These people were and are not only victims of German immigration policies and German racism but they also fight for their own rights and against racism, deportation and laws which discriminate against them. Therefore, racially motivated violation can be understood partly as repression against social movements.
This connection between violation and Governmental Repression is also related to general groups but is increasingly related to specific groups of people (for example Prostitutes and homeless people), admittedly both these examples should help to reach a clarification.
If it seems that the initial framework, which makes violation possible, is at present still unclear then the picture needs to be revised. If people consider police violation of justice as a part of Governmental Repression it is clear that the necessary framework of the picture has to be made so that police violation can fulfil its purpose. The small interest that the judiciary has in carrying out convictions against violation coincided with the fact that the Government does not reject violation as a matter of principle, which people recognise. In principle this is accepted as a means of repression and of the maintainence of the ruling order – it is only problematic if it extends to a scandal and therefore creates critical publicity which in turn scrutinises the way that the police work.
Violation is then publicly exposed and only in such cases is it processed by law and a high fine is imposed. The Anti-Racism Office in Bremen has shown an example of this, relating to the Bremen “Torture Scandal” which took place in 1992 and resulted in the attention to the everyday work of police officers. It also shows police officers resorting to violence but using ‘legal’ means of violation when carrying out violence.
One further question was: why does violation from police officers not only take place in certain centuries and territories, towns or countries, but seems to be carried out anywhere and at any time. Police officers and politicians try to answer this question by stating that violation stems from human nature and therefore they consider it unpreventable. Admittedly it becomes clear that when people recognise repression as an integral part of a democracy, they recognise that police violations are also a concrete means of repression and are therefore a necessary component of democratic states. It goes without saying that there is a difference in the forms and extent of police violation in different centuries and countries. This results however because of the differences between social groups and movements which find themselves in conflict with the respective governing body and are then at the disposal of other forms of repression. A democracy of citizens who have conflicting interests can of course integrate better than an authoritative regime and therefore require less direct repression maintainance by the governing body – the system is however the same. Therefore it seems to be a bit schizophrenic when German politicians condemn police violation against political opponents in Turkey and Techno-fans in the Czech Republic, but turn a blind eye to the circumstances of violation in Germany and to the causes of violation there.
An explanation of violation through its function as a part of Governmental Repression is of course not allowed to mean that the individual and structural deficiences in the (German) police force are denied. The factors which promote, create or at least make people aware of violation are still evident in the training and further education of police officers. Instead, by ethnicising criminality and the criminalisation of social movements, a picture of political opponents is produced which in turn promotes and channels violation. A single police officer is therefore completely unaware of the violation, so they may unconsciously put violation into practise.
In this context of course there is the question of how police violation is ranked in regard to other forms of repression and how it differs from them. The deciding factor, when considering this question, is that police violation, in contrast to other violation, is clearly illegal, even when in concrete cases it is hard to detect, it is still about violation of justice and, by a large percentage of society, is seen as illegal. An exact ranking and range for violation however, still has to be established.
If we recognise that police violation is a special form of Governmental Repression it is important that we also remember the old slogan of the left Anti Repression workers: “Solidarity is a weapon”.
It is just as hard to “abolish” police violation as it is to put an end to Governmental Repression – as bitter as this may seem. Active progress work against police violation is, however, necessary. Repression has the aim of restraining and isolating people and is therefore a shocking example for anyone to follow. With solidarity, something can be started that will stand against violation. The aim of the government has to be that those affected are not left to handle the situation on their own, to minimise the consequences of violation for them and to support them in helping them to know their rights and to help them to break out of the powerless situation of violation that they find themselves in. Various advice centres throughout the federal regions take these issues on board.
It is just as important to be politically active against rigid forms of repression as it is to be politically active against violation. Repression can be limited and fought against through the establishment of critical publicity. Partial success can also be achieved through this so that certain forms of repression become politically too expensive for the government. Here, police violation offers an especially good example where it is recognised by a large part of the population as illegitimate and can also changes can be made by law, leading to the abolishment of police violation. The requirements, for example, for every police officer to have individual identification, may not however actually prevent violation but admittedly, do at least make violation difficult and enhance the political and individual consequences of violation.
© Anti-Diskriminierungsbüro (ADB) Berlin e.V.
Ausstellung: „Vom Polizeigriff zum Übergriff”
www.polizeigriff.de