Constitutionally, Can Police Officers Be Replaced by Soldiers in Times of Crisis?
| Author | N. Baxter |
| Published date | 01 April 1996 |
| Date | 01 April 1996 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X9606900205 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
INSPECTOR
N. BAXTER, BA (Hons)
Royal Ulster Constabulary
CONSTITUTIONALLY, CAN
POLICE OFFICERS BE
REPLACED BY SOLDIERS IN
TIMES OF CRISIS?
The increasing evidence of violence in the towns and cities of the United
Kingdom, both by armed criminals and rioting mobs, has increased the
debate about arming police officers and using other non-police personnel
to enable police officers to concentrate on their
'core'
duties and
responsibilities. One resource available to assist the police is the military.
However, the use of soldiers poses a number of legal and constitutional
dilemmas. An examination of the role of the police and army within
Northern Ireland society during the period
of
the "Troubles" raises issues
which are central to the constitutional relationship between the police, the
army and society. It involves questions relating to the use
of
lethal force
by the police in regulating society in their role as law enforcers.
Northern Ireland has been the only region within the United Kingdom
where this constitutional relationship between the police and the army has
moved from theory into practice. For 26 years the army have been
deployed on the streets of Northern Ireland in an operational role often
described in different ways, eg, "in a peace-keeping role"; "in support of
the RUC" or "in counter-terrorist activity".
The constitutional position
ofthe
army has evolved from the period of
theEnglish Civil War whichended in favour ofParliament; asaconsequence
of this there was a reluctance to allow the army to be solely under the
command of the king. The Bill of Rights which followed the Revolution
of 1688 stated that the raising or the keeping
of
astanding army within the
kingdom in time of peace was illegal without the consent of Parliament.
Mutiny Acts were passed annually to enable the monarch to maintain an
army. In 1955 the Army Act was passed which now has the maximum life
of five years. Thus the control of the army rests with Parliament and not
with the Crown. The army is therefore under the political control of
Parliament and can be ordered into action by the government in power,
using statutory powers and the royal prerogative.
Although the police are very often equated with the army because of
their uniformed appearance and rank structure, the constitutional position
of the police is somewhatdifferent. A police officer holds an "office"and
isanswerable only to the law. Each member
ofthe
police service holds the
same "office" of constable, but may have a different rank. For example a
police superintendent is a constable with the rank
of
superintendent. The
rank structure within the police is for administrative purposes. Asuperior
April 1996 The Police Journal 119
To continue reading
Request your trial