These are interesting times to observe how the public questions institutions and how the resulting public consent fluctuates. Any surge in public support does not come cheaply and any miscalculation can result in a backlash that can take an institution years to repair.

My introduction to questioning institutions came through an undergrad history assignment where I had to plough through massive naval log books kept by the Knights of some of their policing sea ventures in the 1570s and 80s. I’m still very grateful for the lecturer who came up with this credit assessment as it helped me appreciate not only documentary evidence but also to start looking closely at the functions, role and legitimacy of institutions.

It was a culture shock in itself to see the often invisible side of the Christian Knights as the policemen of the Christian Mediterranean. The first shock was that it seemed commonplace that they would stop a “suspicious” naval vessel, whatever the flag, and proceeded with what would today be outright illegal forms of interrogation of captain and crew, not to mention cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. There was always a good reason for ransacking valuable cargo and for leaving vessel and crew high and dry. I lost count of how many times I read how the Knights would pick up on the youngest member of the crew, tie him to the mast, humiliate and flog him mercilessly in front of his mates hoping that someone would rat on the real motive of that vessel’s mission.

What impressed me even more was how such incriminating details were amply reported in the log book but then again, I was looking at it with the benefit of hindsight 450 years later. Scholars of modern policing would call this “legal lawlessness”, a term coined in Canada to explain police coercion and the lack of policing by consent. The Knights’ legal anthropology was clearly unique to the circumstances of their time and not one based within the core values of human rights as we know them. It was probably an  extreme example to study, but it certainly was a good introduction.

This begs a series of  questions: How does one measure culture shock when an institution lapses?   And how does one question a police institution? What are the indicators that an institution is functioning as it should be?

There is, in fact, a model that constitutional law scholars call a “calculus of consent”, which is a combination of the public’s identification with the institution and acceptance of its authority. This was clearly manifested recently in the public outcry following the traffic policeman scandal and more recently the surge in support of the AFM. The Health Superintendence and other institutions in the COVID spotlight are also gaining unprecedented mileage in public consent.

The logical way is to take the best practice indicators and make a comparison. In case of democratic or ethical policing, human rights would be the set standard with which the public can identify and accept police authority. Elsewhere I wrote about Human Rights Policing as being the gold  standard of policing following a  court case in March where a domestic violence victim was re-victimised by the system. Perhaps the best evaluative template to follow is the Council of Europe’s seven benchmarks outlined in the Police and Human Rights programme in 2000. This is quite a tall order that the new police chief needs to look into but it is essential to regain lost ground especially in the long run.

The first  benchmark is crucial to the other six as it relates to the active promotion of the core values of policing in line with human rights, in particular human dignity, fairness and equality of arms. This makes sense, especially within the calculus of consent, because if the institution gets this wrong it would have a domino effect on the remaining benchmarks, namely staff knowledge of human rights, training, management practice and operational policing at all levels of policing, the structure of policing and accountability.

Perhaps the COVID lockdown is a time for the police to question their own institutional drawbacks and to work on regaining lost public consent by actively building strong community policing and public relations.