Vähe on uuringuid, mis tegelevad pikaajaliste valitsemist puudutavate küsimuste mõjuga politseile või turvalisusele. Sestap siinviidatu siinses voos oma koha leidiski. Lugeda tasub seda teksti nii teoreetilise taustsüsteemi avamise kui empiirilise analüüsi tõttu, sh oleks kasulik mõelda, milliseid andmeid võiks koguda kvalitatiivse analüüsi jaoks ja kuidas sama küsimust uurida nt abduktiivsete meetoditega.

Kontekstist:

Historically, states with one-party rule have directed police toward protecting the party and the political order (Aitchison, 2016). This protection has been carried out through a system of surveillance common throughout communist Europe, especially in countries under the Soviet influence. Such policing bred profound fear and mistrust among the public because, at any moment, anyone could be placed under surveillance, jailed, and designated a national security threat through no or a highly politicized legal process.

Autorite ambitsioon:

Our study expands procedural justice theory by centering the power of political regimes to define the purpose and practices of policing. More specifically, we pose a question similar to that posed by Kutnjak Ivkovic (2005, p. 177): “[t]o what extent have the police in transition left their undemocratic pasts behind them?” […] Our emphasis is placed on the importance of considering the political histories of policing in other parts of the continent to understand the heterogeneous experiences with law enforcement and the effects those experiences may have on the public.

Vihje seletusvahenditest:

our perspective is informed by historical institutionalism (a strand of so-called neo-institutionalism), merged with procedural justice theory into a multilevel theoretical formulation of police legitimacy.

Valitsemise jäljed:

Policing in communist countries has been intimately linked with politics. Not responsible solely for public safety, police had the mandate to maintain party rule by clamping down on dissent (Marenin & Caparini, 2005; Mawby, 2001).

Vihjed järeldustest:

We found that countries formerly under communist governments had consistently and significantly lower prevalence of and satisfaction with police contact. […] Even though trajectories of policing and police–public interactions since the fall of Communism, as we argued, are similar and path dependent, there is also idiosyncrasy in the way police forces have changed and the extent to which they remained the same.

Baćak, V., & Apel, R. (2021). Police fairness and legitimacy across the post‐communist divide in Europe. Law & Society Review, 55(3), 473-495