Herb Fellow
New Member
Police spent the better part of Friday last week arresting people enjoying themselves at a night club at the Lang’ata shopping centre in Nairobi. Shouldn’t they have been out catching real criminals? What the mindless raid highlights is the tendency of police to do what they find easy to do rather than chase real criminals who commit real crimes that injure real people and violate or threaten the rights of other people. Police seem, at times, to have a penchant for allocating resources and manpower to tackling victimless crimes — infractions of criminal law in which there is no victim of the crime.
Laws are generally intended to protect people, so if an act criminalised by the Penal Code does not injure or harm anyone it is a victimless crime, and police should not waste valuable time enacting on it at the expense of more serious ones that have identifiable victims. In a democracy, victimless crimes are eventually abolished.
IF ANY DAMAGE IS CAUSED BY A victimless crime the damage is usually borne by the perpetrator, not anybody else; for example, in the case of suicide or drug abuse. Victimless crimes have no complainants. In the Lang’ata case, who complained? Whose rights were violated — other than those of the arrested? The police were probably on a mission to enforce some old colonial law on “corrupt morals”, “obscenity”, “indecency” or “immorality” in the Penal Code. But Kenya is a secular, not religious, state and police should in general ignore victimless crimes that seem to serve no other purpose than to preserve morality or prevent offences against God. Enforcing a moral code should be left to religious leaders. The law should not be used to save people from their sins.
It is certainly bad news for the taxpayer when overzealous police spend public resources tackling victimless crimes instead of catching real criminals such as car thieves, murderers, robbers, burglars and muggers. What motivates such officers? Whatever it is, it is time for some serious rethink on the part of police. With a limited force and resources, not all crimes in our statutes are worth pursuing.
Victimless crimes concerning obscenity, pornography, loitering, vagrancy, drunkenness, prostitution and soliciting sex and minor use of drugs such as bhang should be overlooked for the more serious and detrimental crimes. Other victimless crimes that also seem to attract police enthusiasm are traffic infractions that do not harm anybody such as tainted glass windows or overloading family pick-ups with goods.
There are many victimless crimes — ranging from homosexuality to insider trading — which are time-wasting. Take the latter, for example. Somebody exploits non-publicised information about shares of publicly traded companies, but does not injure anyone. He does not harm the shareholder; he only exercises his economic freedom. Is it worth it pursuing him?
There is no reason for police to spend scarce resources to investigate and prosecute victimless acts. They may in fact be causing more harm by utilising scarce public resources on acts that do not injure anybody and ignoring those that hurt people. Victimless crimes are often difficult to catch and prosecute because there are no complainants or participating witnesses. They can take up so many resources and manpower to police without any tangible benefits to society. By ignoring victimless crimes, police would unburden the courts, decongest jails and profit the economy because more people would be working instead of spending time in court and in prison. In addition, it would give police more time to concentrate on real crimes.
FOCUSING ON VICTIMLESS CRIMES is certainly bad for individual freedom – freedom of expression, movement and association — and therefore runs against the spirit of the Constitution. An individual has the right to take part in any actions he or she chooses as long as they (actions) do not violate, or threaten to violate, the rights of others, even if the actions could be considered harmful to that individual.
Prosecuting victimless crimes also threatens the privacy of innocent people. It also erodes respect for the law.
The essence of common law justice, to which Kenya subscribes, is that people should be free to do whatever they choose to do so long as they do not harm another person.
Peter McWilliams, in his book, Ain’t Nobody’s Business If You Do, captures this sentiment well: “As an adult, you should be allowed to do with your person and property whatever you choose, as long as you don’t physically harm the person or property of another.”
Source: NationMedia.com
Copyright: 2008, Saturday Nation
Contact: PETER MWAURA
Website: Nationmedia.com | Daily Nation | COMMENTARY | Police shouldn’t waste time on crimes without victims
Laws are generally intended to protect people, so if an act criminalised by the Penal Code does not injure or harm anyone it is a victimless crime, and police should not waste valuable time enacting on it at the expense of more serious ones that have identifiable victims. In a democracy, victimless crimes are eventually abolished.
IF ANY DAMAGE IS CAUSED BY A victimless crime the damage is usually borne by the perpetrator, not anybody else; for example, in the case of suicide or drug abuse. Victimless crimes have no complainants. In the Lang’ata case, who complained? Whose rights were violated — other than those of the arrested? The police were probably on a mission to enforce some old colonial law on “corrupt morals”, “obscenity”, “indecency” or “immorality” in the Penal Code. But Kenya is a secular, not religious, state and police should in general ignore victimless crimes that seem to serve no other purpose than to preserve morality or prevent offences against God. Enforcing a moral code should be left to religious leaders. The law should not be used to save people from their sins.
It is certainly bad news for the taxpayer when overzealous police spend public resources tackling victimless crimes instead of catching real criminals such as car thieves, murderers, robbers, burglars and muggers. What motivates such officers? Whatever it is, it is time for some serious rethink on the part of police. With a limited force and resources, not all crimes in our statutes are worth pursuing.
Victimless crimes concerning obscenity, pornography, loitering, vagrancy, drunkenness, prostitution and soliciting sex and minor use of drugs such as bhang should be overlooked for the more serious and detrimental crimes. Other victimless crimes that also seem to attract police enthusiasm are traffic infractions that do not harm anybody such as tainted glass windows or overloading family pick-ups with goods.
There are many victimless crimes — ranging from homosexuality to insider trading — which are time-wasting. Take the latter, for example. Somebody exploits non-publicised information about shares of publicly traded companies, but does not injure anyone. He does not harm the shareholder; he only exercises his economic freedom. Is it worth it pursuing him?
There is no reason for police to spend scarce resources to investigate and prosecute victimless acts. They may in fact be causing more harm by utilising scarce public resources on acts that do not injure anybody and ignoring those that hurt people. Victimless crimes are often difficult to catch and prosecute because there are no complainants or participating witnesses. They can take up so many resources and manpower to police without any tangible benefits to society. By ignoring victimless crimes, police would unburden the courts, decongest jails and profit the economy because more people would be working instead of spending time in court and in prison. In addition, it would give police more time to concentrate on real crimes.
FOCUSING ON VICTIMLESS CRIMES is certainly bad for individual freedom – freedom of expression, movement and association — and therefore runs against the spirit of the Constitution. An individual has the right to take part in any actions he or she chooses as long as they (actions) do not violate, or threaten to violate, the rights of others, even if the actions could be considered harmful to that individual.
Prosecuting victimless crimes also threatens the privacy of innocent people. It also erodes respect for the law.
The essence of common law justice, to which Kenya subscribes, is that people should be free to do whatever they choose to do so long as they do not harm another person.
Peter McWilliams, in his book, Ain’t Nobody’s Business If You Do, captures this sentiment well: “As an adult, you should be allowed to do with your person and property whatever you choose, as long as you don’t physically harm the person or property of another.”
Source: NationMedia.com
Copyright: 2008, Saturday Nation
Contact: PETER MWAURA
Website: Nationmedia.com | Daily Nation | COMMENTARY | Police shouldn’t waste time on crimes without victims
