Banias, Marjelyn Rose S.

Las Piñas Campus

BSCR III

Law Enforcement officers are expected and required to follow law enforcement ethics as defined
by the International Association of Chiefs of Police. This code of ethics, which was written in
1957, often creates ethical issues or dilemmas for those serving to uphold the law. To maintain
their reputations as trustworthy and ethical institutions, law enforcement organizations must
employ a strict code of ethics. This code is generally expressed as a recorded statement of
expectations for employee conduct and an overarching commitment made by the organization to
maintain a specific set of ethical standards. As a future law enforcement officer, my fundamental
duty is to serve mankind. Being a law enforcer this job is not just which we are hired as one of
laborer, it involves a sworn duty. Our service involves dedication and sacrifice of giving our
one’s self. We are expecting to safeguard lives and property, no matter the situation or nature of
the our mission, one imperative remains unchanged, we need to protect human rights. We
believed that mainstreaming human rights based approaches in law enforcement is the very
embodiment of the PNP Motto “To Serve and Protect”. We are expected to respect the
constitutional rights of all men to liberty, equality and justice. More than just being enforcer of
the law, our enforcers are duty bound to respect, protect, and fulfill the rights of citizens. The law
enforcers must promote and protect human rights because this task lies at the very core of
maintaining peace and order, ensuring public safety and upholding the rule of law in the country.
Human Rights is the first business of enforcing. There are basic international human rights
standards for law enforcement. Whereas everyone is entitled to equal protection of the law,
without discrimination on any grounds, and especially against violence and other threats. Be
especially vigilant to protect potentially vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly, women,
refugees, displaced persons, and members of minority groups. We need to treat all citizens and
victims of crime with compassion and respect, with utmost consideration for their need for safety
and privacy. It must be remembered that under the law, all arrested persons and detainees are still
considered innocent and have the right to due process. Only the court can determine their guilt or
innocence. Even when they are already convicted by the court, they still have the right to be
treated humanely, with full respect and dignity. Last December, there was a cop who shot mother
and son in Tarlac which leads him to face murder charges. The suspect went there to confront
them, then the issue of right of way cropped up and the shooting incident happened. The
suspect's anger was apparently triggered by the confrontation between his daughter and the older
Gregorio. It is unacceptable when they are the ones being at the forefront of perpetuating such
human rights violations and expected to not use force except when strictly necessary and to the
minimum extent required under the circumstances and avoid using force when policing unlawful
but non violent assemblies. When dispersing violent assemblies, use force only to the minimum
extent necessary and lethal force should not be used except when strictly unavoidable in order to
protect your life or the lives of others.
Every situation is in some measure unique, and officers must use their personal judgement about
the people involved and the context of the situation, a person’s age, gender, appearance, mental
and emotional state, and economic status are important details that figure into the equation. The
officer must calculate these characteristics in light of a host of other things. However, an officer
who decides to render service or enforce the law based solely on the gender, race, or physical
appearance of the citizen involved is exercising discretion inappropriately. Agencies can
discourage such behavior; proper training can teach why such decisions are unacceptable. An
officer must quickly figure into his or her decision of how to handle a situation by also
considering the severity of the offense and the potential for harm, whether there is a clear victim
and how vulnerable that person might be, especially to future harm. For example, an officer may
decide to follow through on an arrest in a domestic violence situation if a family member is
clearly at risk or if the complaint is not the first one. If an officer has trouble determining who is
at fault in the situation, all parties may end up under arrest to ensure the safety of everyone
involved. Enforcers are held to an extremely high standard that requires their personal lives to
reflect the integrity of their position. They must maintain a professional image at all times
because they are under constant public scrutiny and rely on the public’s trust to maintain their
power position. While most jobs end when the individual clocks out, enforcers are faced with the
ethical issues of maintaining their level of social respect and adherence to the law every moment.
This often puts them in direct conflict with society, especially those that have little respect for
the law or the badge. Each enforcer swears an oath to uphold the law and to defend an
individual’s constitutional rights. One of the ethical issues that an officer faces daily is the ability
to uphold these oaths when they are seemingly contradictory. One of the biggest contradictions
can be found in the nation’s drug laws and subsequent drug wars, which force enforcers to act in
the best interest of the state rather than the individual. When someone is caught with a few illegal
marijuana seeds, they could face imprisonment, fines, job loss, loss of social reputation and lose
custody of their children. An enforcer, however, cannot consider these right to life and liberty
issues because they themselves would be violating the law if they do not arrest and charge the
individual. One of the ethical issue’s enforcers are faced with is the requirement to act
impartially. This idealistic type of oath causes a host of problems in real world situations. It’s not
always possible to act impartially, especially for local and small town officers that handle the
same crowds of people throughout their career. A real world example of this would be an officer
that knows where the local drug houses are, but has no court-acceptable evidence to pursue the
case. The enforcers are expected to follow law enforcement ethics, but he is also limited in his
authority to uphold the law by following certain procedures.