In “Experimentation and Innovation in Police Reform: Timor-Leste, Solomon Islands, and Bougainville,” authors Sinclair Dinnen and Gordon Peake analyze community policing, policing innovation and experimentation in three different post-conflict settings: Timor-Leste, Solomon Islands, and Bougainville. Traditionally, in rural post-conflict settings such as these, police reform has focused primarily on deficits in organizational capacity. However, Dinnen and Peake assert that police reform “should be derived from an understanding of how police and security actually work in the society concerned.” To grasp such an understanding, Dinnen and Peake examine community policing in each setting and focus on their individual social, political, and historical characteristics. Dinnen and Peake conclude that experimental and innovative approaches to police reform should be studied more closely in determining police reform solutions in post-conflict states, but these unconventional approaches are context-specific and do not present universal solutions to complex security and development problems.
Timor-Leste: Beginning in 1999, after Timor-Leste’s vote on independence from Indonesia, the United Nations, along with Australia and New Zealand, spearheaded police reform in Timor-Leste by attempting to build state institutions and a national police force (Polisia Nasional Timor-Leste, or PNTL). Despite these efforts, as of 2008, only 12% of the Timorese public had come into contact with the Timorese police. In a follow-up survey in 2013, the Timorese people overwhelmingly ranked citizens and community leaders ahead of the PNTL in terms of who was responsible for maintaining security. As a result of this perceived disconnect between the nationalized police force and citizens, the Asia Foundation (TAF) established community policing councils (KPKs). The KPKs, each headed by a district chief, serve as a forum for community dispute resolution and have been well received by both citizens and the police. The KPKs, along with other TAF established forums, ensure that police reform is consistent “with prevailing realities and are not considered an outside imposition.”
Solomon Islands: In 2003, following the “ethnic tension” conflict in which the Solomon Islands experienced lawlessness, a fractured government authority and an ethnically divided police force, Australia established the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI) in order to restore security and rebuild communities. In 2011, however, as RAMSI transitioned out of the Solomon Islands, Solomon Islanders expressed safety and security concerns, along with a lack of confidence in the Solomon Islands police force (RSIPF). As a result of these concerns, the RSIPF and RAMSI established Community Officers (COs) in 23 communities whereby these officials acted as a liaison between the RSIPF and local leaders. The presence of the CO structure contributed to improved perceptions of safety among citizens and reestablished connections between the rural villages and the state system.
Bougainville: Following an eight-year conflict between Bougainville and Papa New Guinea (PNG) arising out of disputes over benefit-sharing arrangements at a copper mine located in Bougainville, a locally led peace process resulted in a peace agreement that gave Bougainville status as an autonomous state within PNG and a restructuring of Bougainville’s police force. The Bougainville Community Policing Project (BCPP), funded by Australia and New Zealand, established 340 community-based officers, known as the Community Auxiliary Police (CAP), in 196 communities. One hundred sixty-three Bougainville Police Service officers (BPS), who are located primarily in three urban centers, supervise the CAPs. However, public trust in the BPS remains low because the citizens of Bougainville view the BPS as a continuation of the pre-conflict PNG police force. As a result of this public distrust, the BPS has seen limited results. On the other hand, by aligning with community leadership and placing an emphasis on local beliefs and traditions, the CAP serves as a start to forming the kind of hybrid political order envisaged by the peace agreement.
NOTE: This summary is produced by the Rule of Law Collaborative, not by the original author(s).