Critically examine the crime control strategies employed to fight transnational crime By Christopher Rowe

The aim of this essay is to critically discuss the current crime control strategies in place to combat transnational crime. The essay begins by briefly explaining the extent of the problem of transnational crime in the boarders of Europe, and continues by discussing the need for police co-operation at macro, meso, and micro levels. These levels are analysed whilst addressing the problematic issues that occur as a result of this strategy. Whist the author agrees that it is essential for such authorities to work together at these levels to address the problem of transnational crime, there is evidence of concern discussed in this essay surrounding the efficiency of such policies. The essay then discuses with criticism the structures in place for the promotion of police co-operation in Europe and the effectiveness of the policies such structures implement to control crime. Interpol, Europol, The Schengen Group and The Trevi Group are discussed here. A large part of the criticism of crime control strategies argued in this essay is devised from an evaluation of a study by Dillip K Das and Peter C Kratcoski, this is largely supported by this essay because it is based on a actual research. The scope of the essay is very broad and the crime control strategies discussed are equally on a broad scale, for this reason the essay then explores certain crime control strategies used to fight the trafficking of drugs. This is done through the use of a study by Nicholas Dorn, and demonstrates strategies in eliminating drug wholesalers. The essay argues that to successfully reduce transnational crime a significant improvement of international police co-operation is required. This essay question is important because it addresses the significance of transnational crime in Europe with particular reference to drug trafficking, and highlights the current problems in which crime control strategies face whilst attempting to reduce such crime.

Europe’s multiplicity of frontiers, and freedom of movement within and across national borders, combined with the presence of skilled and sophisticated international criminals, make the whole region a particularly attractive target, not only for indigenous criminals, but also for international gangs (Wilkinson P 1985). Around 1990, the problem of organised crime had begun to attract regular attention in the media (Burnham B 2003). Benyon J et al (1993) states that in general terms the rates for most types of crime appear to be rising in the EU member states. With the emergence of ‘global economies’ and recent reflections on the capacity of modern industrialised societies to transform in the face of powerful political change, crime is receiving recognition as a significant commercial determinant (Findlay M 1999). According to the traditional UN claims, the global trade in illegal drugs exceeds that of iron and steel (Van Duyne P et al 2005). With such concern over the rising levels of transnational organised crime, it is apparent that crime control strategies are implemented and are effective in the reduction of this expanding problem. However, it is argued by Burnham B (2003) that until some sort of quantitative measure of transnational organised crime can be developed, it will not be possible to construct rational strategies and policies to counter it, and above all it would not be possible to evaluate the effectiveness of such strategies and policies.

Governments across Europe increasingly collaborate with each other in economic, financial, and social policies. In the area of crime policies, however each of the European countries is still very much doing its own thing without giving much attention to other developments (Dijk J 1993). The underlying problem which presently exists is how can countries who are bureaucratically bound, and coupled with their respective laws effectively reduce transnational crime. There are structures and arrangements, which exist for promoting police co-operation in Europe. It is suggested very well and is worthy of quotation by Martin P (1999) who believes that the foundation of a successful strategy against transnational crime is political will. A country can have many laws, enforcement units, intelligence agencies and technology, but unless its government is willing to campaign against transnational crime, the opposition will prevail. In the realm of organised crime there is much intelligence and counter intelligence and such an organisation will always capitalise on political weakness. Marenin O (1998) states that success in international initiatives requires a clear goal, the capacity to implement designed programmes, the political will to overcome the inevitable resistance to change by local elites and police forces and a clear awareness of the difficulties of changing one of the most complex jobs and resilient agencies anywhere. However, in order to achieve this, such strategies must be implemented with international co-operation. This is because of nature of transnational crimes such as drug trafficking, organised crime, and illegal immigration etc are crimes in which are committed across state boarders and are problems that require regional and multi-national co-operation.

Sanders D (1996) states that international police co-operation is a subject that has assumed great importance in the increasingly violent, crime infested and dangerous world of today. In a study by Das D et al (1999) it states that at the 4th International Police Executive Symposium in Vienna representatives of every country that participated noted that there was a definite need for bilateral, regional, and multinational police co-operation to combat transnational crime. The symposium participants in whom International agencies represented included Criminal Justice division of the United Nations, Interpol, and Europol agreed that the types of international police interaction needs to take place at three levels of police co-operation. These are the macro-level, meso-level, and micro-level (Das D et al 1999).

Benyon J (1997) states that the macro-level is that which entails constitutional and international agreement, and the harmonisation of national laws and regulations. An example of this would be extradition procedures, and legal discrepancies concerning police powers. At this level it is governments and senior officials, which determine the outcome. Benyon J et al (1993) is however critical of this, and suggests that such high-level agreements can be painfully slow and although there may be a reinforced sprit of goodwill these issues still require a constitutional and legislative framework. The meso-level is concerned with the operational structures, practices and procedures of the police and other law enforcement agencies (Benyon J 1997). It is at this stage that the communication between police forces benefits. This gives police from different countries and across boarders an advantage when co-operating with databases and criminal intelligence. This is an important crime control strategy that can have its advantages in combating transnational crime, but does also however have its criticisms. Das D et al (1999) believes that language barriers and lack of knowledge of other countries customs and cultures are major factors that inhibited the effectiveness of some of the treaties or agreements; this is based on actual research. Further to this Benyon J et al (1993) suggests that there are also problems of technical language and terminologies, which vary between countries. Moreover it is also suggested that compatibility between computer systems and software can cause concern. Benyon J (1997) defines the micro-level as the investigation of specific offences and the prevention and control of particular forms of crime. An example of this would be the investigation of public disorder that has varied between countries. Liaison officers who are seconded from one country to work with their counterparts in another country, especially in the fields of terrorism and drugs are good examples of micro-level co-operation (Benyon J et al 1993).

The promotion of police co-operation at these levels is assisted by three major structures in Europe. These are known as Interpol, the Schengen Group, and the Trevi Group. Interpol (International Criminal Police Organisation) are responsible for promoting mutual assistance between police organisations of separate countries. Interpol are accountable for many areas of crime but most frequently deal with drugs, and counterfeit currency (Benyon J et al 1993). However, Benyon J et al (1993) states that the general impression, conveyed by respondents from several different European countries, is that Interpol’s role in fostering police collaboration in European Union countries is constrained by the fact that it is the international police organisation of the world. Interpol does however; define Europe more widely than the European Union, and for this reason it is being briefly discussed in this essay. Further to the previous criticism Benyon J et al (1993) suggests that in the past criticisms have been made not least by police officers themselves whilst discussing the inefficiency of Interpol activities.

Das D et al (1999) states that the quality of the services provided by Interpol is highly dependant on the amount of co-operation, assistance, and financial support received from the member nations. Interpol requires service from its member countries police departments before any help can be offered. This is not always obtainable because not all countries can afford the full statutory contribution for the services of Interpol, if this is the case the service received may be deficient. However, more important is the quality of the relationship between the General Secretariat and the various law enforcement agencies that serve as the National Central Bureaux of Interpol. These officers and the stations in which they are housed are paid from the national budgets of the member nations, and the work they complete is essential to the mission of the organisation (Das D et al 1999). For this to be a success it is dependant on the General Secretariat’s knowledge on the each country, and the compatibility of each countries technology. To take an overview on the service offered by Interpol it is apparent that as a crime control strategy it is not an ideal solution for every country.

Despite Interpol’s substantial vested interest in Europe, it can never be the sole communication system used, and it is possibly for this reason that Europol (European Police Office) was created. Like Interpol, the underlying goal of Europol is to develop the efficacy of police co-operation for its member countries. Europol is committed to exchanging information with and supporting the police efforts of member states in the areas of establishing databases, investigations, analysis of crime data, training of officers, research, crime prevention strategies, and forensic matters (Das D et al 1999).

The Schengen Group was created in June 1985 and is believed by Edwards A et al (2003) like the Trevi Group to be the result of American attempts to control Interpol. The agreement acknowledged the need to abolish obstacles to the free movement of goods and persons, notably boarder controls. The Schengen Group authorised the detailed discussion of a number of issues concerned with police and criminal justice co-operation (Benyon J et al 1993). A key element of The Schengen Group is the establishment of a computerised data exchange system called the Schengen Information System (SIS). The purpose of this system is to develop a common computerised database containing information from each of its member countries. The system is intended to be used by all police and customs officers in the nine Schengen countries in order to access information on missing or wanted persons, people to be refused entry, and stolen property (Benyon J et al 1993). However, some members of the EU (European Union) have chose not to become members of the Schengen Group. Most notably is the UK (United Kingdom), Benyon J et al (1993) believes this to be because of the British tradition of freedom of movement, and the intrusive Schengen external borders are likely to be no more than a ‘leaky sieve’ in comparison to the efficient and effective existing frontier controls. The Trevi Group was established in 1976 by a number of European Nations as a means to combat the threat of international terrorism, radical extremism and violence. Its function was to implement policy established by the member states of the European Union (El Zein S 1997). According to Benyon J et al (1993) there are mixed feelings stated from police officers and academics about the effectiveness of Trevi. There is an agreement that the Trevi Group have made a positive impact with regard to anti-drugs and anti-terrorist measures, it is claimed by some that fine words have not necessarily been translated into practice. Further to this Benyon J et al (1993) states that The Trevi Group have been accused of being too secretive, having a lack of co-ordination within the structure, and providing insufficient input to the working groups of police.

The purpose of this essay is to be critical of such crime prevention strategies and it can be said with evidence to follow that international police co-operation has not been devoid of its problems. The major obstacle to crime prevention strategies implemented through police co-operation structures is national independence. Wilkinson P (1985) suggests that all European governments remain stubbornly attached to the principle of autonomous national decision making in the light of perceived national interests. If this is the case crime prevention strategies through police co-operation have failed before they have even commenced, this is noted by the author as a large criticism of structures such as Interpol, Europol, The Schengen Group and The Trevi Group because full co-operation of its member states is required to achieve effective results in the reduction of transnational crime. In a study by Das D et al (1997) it is concluded that problems entailed whilst implementing crime control strategies are created by geographic factors, cultural and linguistic complexities, dearth of professional standards, specific difficulties (internal disturbances that create the demise of the civil society), lack of laws relating to organised crime, extradition, passports and other matters, and perhaps most importantly a lack of trust.

To begin, when some countries enter agreements such as Interpol they often do not have the manpower or equipment to adequately provide the type of control required by these structures, this is possibly due to the large extensive boarders in which some countries have. If there is insufficient control of the borders it makes it easier for transnational crime such as the trafficking of drugs and humans to excel. As previously stated in this essay language barriers and issues of technological compatibility can also affect the efficiency of a crime control strategy. Police corruption and particularly the corruption of high-level government officials can be a major inhibitor of co-operative ventures. Das D et al (1997) states that at times agreements can be made at the diplomatic level, with knowledge on the part of both countries that there is little chance of the provisions of the agreement being operational. The reasons in which countries have poor relationships and the agreements have little substance are many. Specific difficulties for different countries also inhibit police success, this is namely in the form of a lack of personnel, equipment, and resources. There is a need for improvement of these three issues, and to the credit of Interpol and other organisations there have been significant contributions in terms of funds and other types of resources, in helping the poorer nations to develop their law enforcement organisations and upgrade their information systems (Das D et al 1997). However the only criticism of this is that the level of funding has not increased with the dramatic increase of crime problems in developing countries. A lack of trust between countries can often hinder problems when co-operation is required to fight transnational crime. The age old distrust between the English and the Irish or the Mexicans and the Americans has not vanished in the face of ever-menacing crimes like drug trafficking, money laundering, child prostitution, illegal immigration, and other dangerous criminal enterprises (Das D et al 1997).

As previously stated there is a large call for the improvement of the legal framework through which the police co-operative activities are carried out. The standardisation of extradition treaties, laws pertaining to organised crime, drug trafficking, counterfeiting, illegal immigration, and the standardisation of passports would lead to an overall improvement in the effectiveness of the agreements, and would help define what forms or types of arrangements that would be needed (Das D et al 1997). This looks to be an ambitious statement but does have good merit in the outcome that it would provide, however as this may never become a reality, it maybe required look forward to alternative strategies in transnational crime control.

In an attempt to focus further on the evaluation of crime control strategies for combating transnational crime the author believes that it is important to discuss a particular strategy used to fight a single crime, for the purpose of this essay trafficking in drugs will be evaluated. In a study by Dorn N et al (1992) it states that British drug enforcement is organised into three levels, each of which is intended to target corresponding level of the drug market (importer through to wholesalers and retailers). For the purposes of this essay the middle level response will be critically discussed. Drug wholesalers represent a vital link in drug networking. In eliminating wholesalers whom are renowned for being more vigilant criminals, it is possible to cause an upset in the drug market. Dorn N et al (1992) states that in Britain the middle level is the province of the specialist drug squads in each police force, an often problematic factor in practice is deciding which targets belong to which enforcement levels.

Undercover work, together with surveillance and financial investigations, are methods that may be used in various combinations against a variety of targets. Probably the most feared tactic by the career criminal is the ‘buy bust’ operation (Dorn N et al 1992). There are many variations to the ‘buy bust’ operation, for instance informants can be used to make initial purchases of drugs whilst under surveillance, this also leaves the possibility of introducing an undercover police officer at a later stage as another buyer, once enough evidence is gathered an arrest can be made. Another variation would be for the undercover police officer or informant to make series of purchases before arranging the purchase of a large amount of drugs and making the arrest. In a critique of this strategy Dorn N et al (1992) states that it is possible for the transient dealer to move on and the co-ordination of simultaneous raids is expensive. Further to this working from street dealers to retailers and wholesalers can be very dangerous. The risk rises for all parties, as there is more money and drugs involved, there is a further risk of police losing money and also the possibility of both parties carrying weapons into such operations. Dorn N et al (1992) states that ‘buy bust’ strategies have a curious and uncertain position in Britain. Although under cover buys do occur, there remain potential sensitivities because of the agent provocateur aspect.
This essay question is very broad in its context, and can be interpreted and argued in different ways, the essay has concentrated on a small number of crime control strategies currently in place in Europe in an attempt to grasp a good criticism and demonstrate the need for further attention concerning transnational crime. In conclusion, the essay has provided significant evidence that this is the case. The essay demonstrates that currently the problem of transational crime is of great consequence in Europe. This provided a foundation for the discussion of the essential crime control strategies employed. The three levels of police co-operation (macro, meso, micro) are vital to the ongoing fight to eliminate or reduce transnational crime, whilst acknowledging this fact the author has highlighted some areas in this process in which improvement is needed. This is namely discussed with reference to the difficult constitutional and legislative framework in place at the macro level and language and technology barriers at the meso-level. The various structures in Europe employed to promote police co-operation in Europe have received heavy criticism from this essay. Interpol’s service is dependant on a statutory contribution by each of its member countries, if the financial burden is too much the service received will be depleted. This underlying factor makes Interpol as a crime control strategy difficult to implement for many countries. Whatever the structure responsible for the co-operation of police in Europe there is much criticism for the efficiency of the crime control strategy, this essay has briefly highlighted that these problems are created by geographic factors, cultural and linguistic complexities, dearth of professional standards, specific difficulties (internal disturbances that create the demise of the civil society), lack of laws relating to organised crime, extradition, passports, and perhaps most importantly a lack of trust. In an attempt to gain a more focused evaluation and critique of crime control strategies this essay demonstrated some of the tactics used by police to combat the trafficking of drugs. The ‘buy bust’ operation was evaluated revealing that whilst this tactic can be very successful it also has very high risk factors relating to the safety of the police and the resources used.

References:

Benyon J (1997) ‘The Developing system of Police Co-operation in the European Union’ in McDonald W (eds), Crime and Law Enforcement in the Global Village, Cincinnati, Anderson

Benyon J, Turnbull L, Willis A, Woodward R, Beck A (1993) Police Co-operation in Europe: An Investigation, Leicester, Centre for the Study of Public Order

Burnham B (2003) ‘Meashuring Transnational Organised Crime’ in Edwards A, Gill P (eds) Transnational Organised Crime Perspectives on Global Security, USA, Routledge

Das D, Kratcoski P (1999) ‘An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management’ International Police Co-operation: A World Perspective, Volume 22. No 2, pp 214 – 241

Dijk J (1993) ‘More than a Matter of Security, Trends in Crime Prevention in Europe’ in Heidensohn F, Farrell M (eds) Crime in Europe, London, Routledge

Dorn N, Murji K, South N (1992) Traffickers, Drug Markets and Law Enforcement, London, Routledge

Edwards A, Gill P (2003) Transnational Organised Crime Perspectives on Global Security, USA, Routledge

El Zein S (1997) ‘Role of the ICPO-Interpol in International Police co-operation’ paper prepared for the 4th International Police Executive Symposium, Vienna

Findlay M (1999) The Globalisation of Crime, Understanding Transnational Relationships in Context, UK, Cambridge University Press

Marenin O (1998) ‘Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management’ The Goal of Democracy in International Police Assistance Programs, Volume 21, No 1, pp 159 - 177

Martin P (1999) ‘Confronting Transnational Crime’ in Viano E (eds), Global Organized Crime and International Security, England, Ashgate Publishing Ltd

Sanders D (1996) ‘The Police Chief’ The Years Ahead, Volume 63, No 11, pp 7

Van Duyne P, Levi M (2005) Drugs and Money, Managing the Drug Trade and Crime-money in Europe, USA, Routledge

Wilkinson P (1985) ‘European Police Co-operation’ in Roach J, Thomaneck J (eds), Police and Public Order in Europe, Great Britain, Croom Helm Ltd