Use The Police To Fight Corruption Instead Of Civil Institutions!!

It just a common knowledge that the social structures ( institutional setting ) of developed countries is averagely similar in nature. That is to say, if you live In France, you can deductively conclude that the institutional setup in France for example is almost the same as that of United States of America albeit with little but insignificant difference. I surmise the force behind institutional setting similarity is efficiency drive. It may sound strange that in France, it is the police which processes and issues identity cards, passports also in charge of processing and issuance of residence and working permits to its citizens and foreigners. Simply put, it is the police which is directly in charge of identification of nationals and non nationals because the police means business with regard to data collection and immigration control

The police in my country, Ghana is charged to fight "petty" crimes/offences and apparently mediate disputes. The role of the police in Ghana compared with that of police in developed countries, or rather what exactly should the job of the police be, ours is a joke. In any case, isn't it completely preposterous for the police service fixated to combat goat thief, even armed robber and be relatively lenient to those who commit institutional fraud and political malfeasance in corridors of power? Those 'criminals' are, in my opinion are the baddest --for lack of exact english word for it - though admitting that goat thieves and armed robbers are society vils too

The police - with the reference of intelligence service - is regarded as the most powerful institution in the developed countries, sometimes more powerful than the executive branch of government, even above the president, the reason why the police wouldn't hesitate to arrest the president should he breach the laws despite the fact that member of executive branch is usually the over all boss, in effect the minister of interior. The police in Israel will soon arrest and arraign before court the wife of PM, Benjamin Netanyahu for opulence and extravagant use of state resources, is just one more example. This will only be a mirage in the apart of the world we live

Our fight against institutional or corporate corruption, political malfeasance is not working because, the so-called big men have apportioned themselves more powers than the anti-corruption institutions have and these institutions appear weak in front of them, inevitably unable to confront them head on. Institutional setting, the 'system' ( where police service is directly used to fight corruption ) in United States of America is not different from those of European countries, neither are those of Canada, Australia, Japan, infact all developed countries, if you wish, advanced democracies. In US, District Attorney Office or the DA Office is synonymous to yet to be established Independent/Special Prosecutor office in Ghana

What I don't know is whether we have sufficient resources to establish Independent Prosecutor offices nationwide, may be no but in US, DA office is obviously in every district nationwide. But whether is DA or Special/Independent Prosecutors Office. They are prosecutors and without the work of the police, they are worthless. In other words, prosecutors office is the organ that examines the evidence gathered by the police to verify whether the evidence is enough or not to indict a suspect and arraign him/her in court. We aren't developed countries but we want efficiency hence my suggestion to create "police office" to fight corruption instead prosecutors. Rather the so much expected prosecutor office is likely to fail when not properly designed and implemented

Meanwhile some suggested that ensuring the Independence or autonomy of these anti-corruption institutions is key to fighting corruption. That is good suggestion anyway but no matter how much the independence and autonomy of these institutions are guaranteed, a third party is likely to corrupt them. On the other hand some suggested pay rise and the use of technology. Well, to some extent yes but insignificant degree in fight against corruption. I vouch for the use of the police to fight corruption. To buttress my point, the actions of FBI during pre and post electoral era in US in recent days until President Trump fired the director of FBI is indication that the police/FBI doesn't not necessarily have to take directives from government officials. Not even from Attorney General Department who were political appointees from Obama Administration and needless to say Obama was supporting Hilary Clinton

Even as President Trump fired James Comey, FBI director, the new director, just as it was done to Hilary Clinton, will pick up from where his predecessors left the investigation to link Trump's administration with Russia and possible impeachment, the so-called the 'direction where the investigation is leading'. This is happening while Trump is the president. The FBI/police doesn't have to take orders from president or nobody else, the police has to do what is good for the country. That exactly is my point, our anti-corruption institutions have failed ( rampant corruption persists ) because they have been intimidated by big and powerful people in our society

Apart from to combat crime or corruption, what makes police different from civil anti-corruption institutions, the police has the sacred responsibility to enforce law and order and corruption can trigger civil strife, can't afford that so it tackles corruption from its root

Agobodzo Richard
You can contact me via [email protected] or
www.facebook.com/Agobodzo Richard