CPH Post


Editorial | To protect and to serve

Being able to identify police officers gives people the chance to confront cops who run amok. For the police, it allows them to show they aren't sweeping anything under the rug

The 2009 UN climate conference was marred by numerous displays of heavy-handed policing (Photo: Colourbox)

November 8, 2013


It’s turning out that the 2009 climate conference is being remembered more for the way the cops treated protesters than any accomplishments the summit may have achieved. With the police on edge about possible disruptions to the biggest event ever held in the city, residents and visitors alike witnessed demonstrations broken up with heavy-handed tactics normally reserved for rock-throwing anarchists. Unfortunately, it was often ordinary people – including grandparents, nuns and Hare Krishna followers – who got caught up in the police’s pre-emptive strikes.

Given the heightened tensions during those heady December days, and the need to protect high-level officials in the city at the time, the police may just have been justified in their actions – including the detention of a man whose name corresponded to that of a suspected terrorist. It could also be that the 13 hours of detention were justified. But given the lack of co-operation by the police department as a whole and the refusal of the individual officers involved to come forward, we can only assume that the man was mistreated.

Proving this assumption beyond a reasonable doubt, however, would require being able to speak with the officers involved, as well as their superiors. That’s not likely to happen in this instance, but it is possible to prevent it from happening again by making it possible to identify an individual officer. Concern that officers could be subject to reprisals is valid and should be taken seriously, yet so should people’s ability to easily confront an officer they feel acted inappropriately.

A clear identification system must also be in the interest of cops as well, since (provided they had done nothing wrong) it could serve to remove suspicion about them as an individual and the police force as a whole, should the individual officer happen to be ‘unidentifiable’.

In the case that an officer did something wrong, ID symbols would speed up an investigation and see offending officers dealt with appropriately, as well as perhaps allowing them to give an account of the sequence of events as seen through their visors. Maybe they were provoked. Maybe they feared for their safety. Or maybe they were acting on the orders of a superior (which actually did occur in one of the most violent police actions during the conference.) In such instances, requiring officers to explain their actions would give them the chance to finger the person who is truly responsible.

Officers will bemoan the introduction of a system that makes it easy to identify them, since it takes away their ability to get off the hook by blending into a crowd. But for police departments, it will only serve as a reminder to everyone that they are there to protect the people – not themselves.

Related stories

Latest Comments

(November 30, -1 00:00)

Excellent article, how frustrating to be always singled out based purely on...

(Jason Lennick on April 17, 2014 13:43)

I don't know that people in Denmark have time for 'leisurely' fishing. Most...

(Calvin Bernhardt on April 17, 2014 12:19)

Oh no! This can't be true. Danes cheating on their tax returns. Haha.

(Calvin Bernhardt on April 17, 2014 12:15)

(November 30, -1 00:00)

And why aren't the children given pain medication? Perhaps, there is a...

(Calvin Bernhardt on April 17, 2014 12:11)

The road to heaven is paved with good intentions. I think the Danish pig...

(Calvin Bernhardt on April 17, 2014 12:07)

Talk about putting the cart in front of the horse. Surely Lars will think of...

(Calvin Bernhardt on April 17, 2014 12:04)

Yeah, its going to happen again. This time the financial crisis will be much...

(Calvin Bernhardt on April 17, 2014 12:01)

Hello! Who the hell didn't know this?

(Calvin Bernhardt on April 17, 2014 11:59)