Home » Take Action » Become a Student Activist » Case of the Month Archives » October 2001
Overview
Civilian Investigative Panel
Following last year's street protests over the fate of Elian Gonzalez and a series of "questionable" police shootings earlier this summer, community members began calling on elected officials and top police brass within the City of Miami to create a citizen-controlled panel to investigate allegations of police misconduct.
The highly-publicized arrest of Miami immigration attorney Grisel Ibarra during the Elian Gonzalez controversy ignited criticism over the way Miami Police officers handled crowds during protests in the city's Little Havana neighborhood. The ACLU of Florida received a number of complaints from protestors claiming that they were subjected to unnecessary and excessive use of police force.
In other unrelated incidents, Miami Police have been involved in five fatal shootings since 1999, according to police records and news reports. They include: Jesse Runnels, 25, on March 23, 1999; Antonio Butler, 19, on Sept. 20, 1999; Antonio Coloma, 45, on Sept. 11, 2000, Nick Singleton, 18, on April 30, 2001; and Richard Wayne Beatty, 55, on June 6, 2001. Thirteen City of Miami police officers are now facing criminal charges, accused, among other things, of covering up unjustified shootings by engaging in "throw downs" - planting guns at crime scenes.
Reports of police misconduct and excessive use of force continue to make headlines not only in Miami, but across the country as well. While most well-publicized shootings or allegations of misconduct lead to formal investigations, they are usually conducted by a police department's Internal Affairs Section, that is, by police officers themselves. And not surprisingly, the officers' actions are frequently deemed justifiable and officers are usually - if not always - exonerated, further straining community relations with police.
Trust between citizens and the men and women sworn to protect them is essential to improving police-community relations. One way to regain such trust is through a civilian oversight agency, like the Civilian Investigative Panel (CIP) that has been proposed for the City of Miami. Civilian oversight provides an impartial forum for citizens to file complaints of police misconduct. This is not a new concept. The movement for civilian oversight began over 40 years ago, and today there are more than 100 different agencies, found in 80% of the big cities in the U.S.
Successful Models
One of the more successful models of civilian oversight is the San Francisco Office of Citizen Complaints (OCC). First established in 1982, the OCC had to struggle for years to become a fully effective agency. However, by the late 1990s all this had changed. The OCC formed good working relationships with the police department. So good, in fact, that in 1997, the chief of police accepted all of the OCC's recommendations.
In Minneapolis, the Civilian Review Authority (CRA) established in 1995 has been so successful and trusted by police officers that their union has recommended that the officers choose the CRA's mediation program to resolve complaints.
What Critics Say
Civilian review boards do, however, have their share of critics. Police officers and union members have criticized the oversight agencies and many others like them for their ineffectiveness.
Critics argue civilian review boards:
1. often times fail to meet their goals
2. do not have properly trained staff members to complete criminal
investigations
3. may interfere with on-going police investigations and
4. inadvertently immunize police officers who should be prosecuted
or fired.
Local Efforts
Using San Francisco and Minneapolis as models, a group of Miami community leaders, including police officers and elected officials, ironed out a proposal for a Civilian Investigative Panel for the City of Miami. The purpose of the Civilian Investigative Panel is to (a) provide for civilian oversight of City of Miami Police through the creation of an independent, unbiased and broadly representative panel that can investigate police misconduct, review police policies and practices, and make recommendations to the Chief of Police (b) create an unbiased forum for citizens to file complaints alleging police misconduct and Police officers to report misconduct by fellow officers and (c) re-establish and strengthen the community's confidence in the men and women sworn to protect them.
On August 9, 2001, Miami City Commissioners voted unanimously to approve a proposed charter amendment outlining the creation of a Civilian Investigative Panel. (A charter outlines the various functions of government and spells out how cities operate. Proposed changes to a city charter must be approved by city residents in a general election). The charter amendment will be on the ballot in a Miami election scheduled for November 6, 2001. The ballot question asks the city's registered voters to decide whether to create a Civilian Investigative Panel.
General Authority
Commissioners authorized the panel to conduct independent investigations of police misconduct, review policies of the MPD and make recommendations to the police chief with regard to disciplinary measures against officers. They also agreed to provide the CIP with adequate city funding to support a staff and maintain offices outside of police headquarters. It is vital that the offices of the CIP be separate from the police, as victims of police abuse are often intimidated by lodging a complaint against an officer in the same building in which he/she works with colleagues.
Another authority allotted to the CIP is subpoena power. The CIP will have the authority to issue a subpoena that will compel witnesses, including police officers, to appear before the board. This authority may only be used upon the approval of the panel's attorney and in consultation with the State Attorney's Office. (The State Attorney for the 11th Judicial Circuit of Florida, which includes Miami-Dade County, is Katherine Fernandez Rundle. As the legal arm of the law enforcement community, the State Attorney is responsible for prosecuting individuals facing criminal charges).
The CIP also will have the power to subpoena relevant documents and other items to conduct investigations related to complaints of police misconduct. Enforcement of CIP subpoenas will come from appropriate court orders. Historically, one of the major obstacles in ensuring successful civilian review has been the refusal of police offers to testify. With subpoena power, the CIP hopes to be able to thoroughly investigate allegations of abuse and misconduct by interviewing officers and civilians and reviewing pertinent documents.
The CIP does not have the power to grant immunity - or protection from criminal prosecution - and it must advise all city employees appearing before it that they will not be punished for "Pleading the Fifth" or exercising their constitutional right against self-incrimination (by refusing to testify). The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that an individual "shall not be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself."
Although the CIP cannot revamp the citizen complaint process overnight, it can - with the powers mentioned above and effective leadership - help reduce the growing gulf between police and citizens and promote trust and accountability. By providing citizens with a means to bring complaints against law enforcement officers before a panel made up of mostly citizens, the Civilian Investigative Panel hopes to reduce public reluctance to file complaints, reduce procedural barriers in filing claims, and increase police accountability to the public it serves.
