Module 6.16: Comparative Police Systems

Introduction

Comparative Police Systems is the study of how different countries organize, manage, and operate their police forces. By examining police systems around the world, we can identify best practices, learn from mistakes, and understand why the Philippine National Police (PNP) is structured the way it is.

Sa simpleng salita: Pag-aralan natin kung paano nag-operate ang pulis sa ibang bansa—US, UK, Japan, France, etc.—para malaman natin kung ano ang pwedeng i-adopt sa Pilipinas at kung ano ang dapat iwasan.

Key Learning Objectives:

Differentiate between centralized and decentralized police systems.
Compare the police systems of major countries (US, UK, France, Japan, China).
Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of each system.
Understand the Philippine police system in a global context.

Board Exam Tip: Comparative police systems is a common LEA topic. Expect questions about the difference between centralized and decentralized systems, and examples of each. Memorize the key features of at least 3-4 major police systems.

I. Types of Police Systems

A. Centralized (National) Police System

Definition: A police system where there is a single, national police force controlled by the central government.

Characteristics:

One national law enforcement agency
Uniform standards across the country
Centralized command and control
National funding and budget

Advantages:

Uniform training and professionalism
Efficient coordination (no jurisdictional conflicts)
National response to major crimes (terrorism, organized crime)

Disadvantages:

Less responsive to local needs
Risk of abuse (single powerful force)
Political control can lead to authoritarianism

Examples:

France - National Police (Police Nationale) + National Gendarmerie
Japan - National Police Agency (NPA)
Philippines - Philippine National Police (PNP)
China - People's Police (under Ministry of Public Security)
Italy - Carabinieri and Polizia di Stato

Sa centralized system, iisa lang ang command. Lahat ng pulis sa buong bansa ay under ng isang organization lang. Advantage: Maganda ang coordination. Disadvantage: Baka ma-abuse ang power ng central government.

B. Decentralized (Local) Police System

Definition: A police system where law enforcement is organized at the local or regional level, with multiple independent police agencies.

Characteristics:

Multiple independent police forces (city, county, state)
Local control (mayors, local councils)
Local funding (local taxes)
Varying standards (each agency has its own policies)

Advantages:

Highly responsive to local needs
Community-based policing is easier
Less risk of national tyranny

Disadvantages:

Lack of coordination between agencies
Jurisdictional disputes
Unequal quality (rich cities have better police than poor cities)

Examples:

United States - 18,000+ independent police agencies (FBI, state police, county sheriffs, city police)
United Kingdom - 43 territorial police forces (Metropolitan Police, Greater Manchester Police, etc.)
Canada - Federal (RCMP), Provincial, Municipal
Germany - Polizei (state-level under 16 federal states)

Sa decentralized system, bawat city or state ay may sariling pulis. Example: Sa US, may NYPD (New York), LAPD (Los Angeles), Chicago PD—lahat independent. Advantage: Mabilis ang response sa local issues. Disadvantage: Minsan walang coordination pag regional ang crime.

Summary: Centralized vs. Decentralized

Feature	Centralized	Decentralized
Organization	Single national force	Multiple local/state forces
Control	Central government	Local governments
Funding	National budget	Local taxes
Standards	Uniform nationwide	Varies by locality
Coordination	Excellent	Challenging
Example	Philippines, France, Japan	USA, UK, Canada

II. Major Police Systems Around the World

A. United States

Type: Decentralized (Extremely Fragmented)

Structure:

Federal Level
- FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) - National crimes, terrorism, organized crime
- DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) - Drug crimes
- ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms) - Federal firearm and explosives violations
- Secret Service - Presidential protection, financial crimes
State Level
- State Police / Highway Patrol - Traffic enforcement, crimes on state highways
- State Bureaus of Investigation - Support to local agencies
Local Level
- County Sheriff - Elected, operates county jails and patrols unincorporated areas
- City/Municipal Police - City law enforcement (NYPD, LAPD, etc.)

Total: Over 18,000 independent police agencies in the US.

Key Features:

High degree of local autonomy
Elected sheriffs (unique to US)
No national police force (FBI is investigative, not a national police)
Community policing is widely practiced

Challenges:

Coordination issues (9/11 attacks revealed communication gaps)
Varying standards (some agencies are highly professional, others are poorly trained)

Sa US, sobrang dami ng police agencies. Bawat city, county, state—may sariling pulis. Kaya minsan mahirap ang coordination, lalo na sa cross-border crimes.

B. United Kingdom

Type: Decentralized (Regional)

Structure:

43 Territorial Police Forces in England and Wales
- Metropolitan Police (London) - Largest, also handles national security
- Greater Manchester Police, West Midlands Police, etc.
Police Scotland (Centralized for Scotland)
Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI)

National Agencies:

National Crime Agency (NCA) - UK's version of the FBI
MI5 - Domestic intelligence (not police, but works with police)

Key Features:

Policing by consent - The Peelian Principles (see below)
Unarmed police - Most officers do not carry firearms (only specialized units)
Civilian oversight - Police and Crime Commissioners (elected)

Peelian Principles (Sir Robert Peel, 1829):

The police exist to prevent crime and disorder.
The ability of police to perform their duties depends on public approval.
Police must secure the cooperation of the public.
The use of physical force is a last resort.

Ang UK police ay kakaiba—karamihan ay walang baril! Baton lang at pepper spray. Kasi belief nila na pag naka-gun ang pulis, mas violent ang kalalabasan. Pero may specialized armed units naman for serious threats.

C. France

Type: Centralized (Dual System)

Structure:

Police Nationale (National Police)
- Urban areas
- Under Ministry of Interior
- Civilian police
Gendarmerie Nationale
- Rural areas, highways, military installations
- Military police (part of Armed Forces)

Key Features:

Dual system - Civilian (Police Nationale) and Military (Gendarmerie)
Centralized control - Both report to national government
Municipal police exist but have limited powers

Sa France, may dalawang police forces—civilian at military. Ang civilian police ay nag-hahandle ng cities, ang military police (gendarmerie) ay nag-hahandle ng rural areas. Parang sa Pilipinas, dati may PC (Constabulary) at local police—dual system din.

D. Japan

Type: Centralized (National with Prefectural Execution)

Structure:

National Police Agency (NPA) - Sets policy, coordinates, handles national crimes
47 Prefectural Police - Execute policing under NPA supervision
- Tokyo Metropolitan Police Department (largest)

Key Features:

Highly disciplined and professional
Low crime rate (one of the lowest in the world)
Koban System - Small police boxes (koban) in every neighborhood for community policing
Strict gun control - Firearms are almost entirely banned

Ang Japan ay isa sa pinaka-safe na bansa sa mundo. Dahilan: Strict gun control, disciplined police, at yung koban system—may maliit na police station sa bawat kanto para mabilis ang response at mataas ang visibility.

E. China

Type: Centralized (Authoritarian)

Structure:

Ministry of Public Security (MPS) - National level
People's Police - Implements MPS policies
- Public Security Bureau (PSB) - General policing
- State Security Bureau - Political security, espionage
- People's Armed Police (PAP) - Paramilitary

Key Features:

Highly centralized and controlled by the Communist Party
Dual role - Crime control and political control (suppress dissent)
Extensive surveillance (facial recognition, social credit system)

Sa China, ang police ay hindi lang nag-eenforce ng criminal law—involved din sila sa political control. Kung ikaw ay kritiko ng government, pwede kang hulihin ng police. Kaya centralized system + authoritarian government = risky combination.

F. Germany

Type: Decentralized (Federalized)

Structure:

16 State Police Forces (Landespolizei) - One for each federal state
Federal Police (Bundespolizei) - Borders, railways, airports, federal buildings
Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) - Serious crimes, coordination

Key Features:

State autonomy - Each state controls its own police
No national police force (reaction to Nazi-era centralized Gestapo)
Community policing emphasized

Dahil sa trauma ng Nazi regime (Gestapo), ayaw ng Germany ng centralized police. Kaya decentralized sila—bawat state ay may sariling police.

III. The Philippine Police System in Comparative Context

A. Evolution: From Decentralized to Centralized

Pre-1975: Decentralized

Multiple local police forces (Manila Police, city/municipal police)
Philippine Constabulary (national, but military)

1975-1990: Integrated National Police (INP)

First attempt at centralization (under PC)
Still military in character

1991-Present: Philippine National Police (PNP)

Centralized, civilian, national police force
Under DILG (civilian control)

Current System:

Centralized structure (single national force)
Local deployment (police assigned to cities/municipalities)
Civilian character (separated from military)

Ang Pilipinas ngayon ay centralized system (like France, Japan), pero may local deployment (police sa bawat city). Best of both worlds—national standards pero responsive sa local needs.

B. Comparison with Other Systems

Country	System	Unique Feature
Philippines	Centralized	Civilian, under DILG
United States	Decentralized	18,000+ independent agencies
United Kingdom	Decentralized	Unarmed police (mostly)
France	Centralized (Dual)	Civilian + Military police
Japan	Centralized	Koban community policing
China	Centralized	Political control role
Germany	Decentralized	Federal states control police

IV. Lessons for the Philippines

A. What We Can Learn from Other Systems

From the US:

Community policing programs
Use of technology (crime mapping, databases)

From the UK:

Peelian Principles (policing by consent)
Civilian oversight mechanisms

From Japan:

Koban system (already partially adopted as "Pulis sa Barangay")
Emphasis on discipline and professionalism

From France:

Dual system (we used to have this with PC + local police)

From Germany:

De-emphasis on militarization of police

B. Challenges Facing the PNP

Political Interference - Need for true civilian control (not politician control)
Corruption - Address "kotong," "laglag-bala," etc.
Resource Constraints - Underfunded, under-equipped
Public Trust - Rebuild legitimacy after drug war controversies

Conclusion & Key Takeaways

Comparative police systems teach us that there is no "one size fits all" model. Each country's police system reflects its history, culture, and political structure. The Philippines, with its centralized civilian police force, occupies a middle ground—seeking to balance national coordination with local responsiveness. By learning from the successes and failures of other countries, the PNP can continue to evolve and improve.

Key Concepts to Remember:

Centralized System: Single national force (Philippines, France, Japan, China)
Decentralized System: Multiple local forces (US, UK, Germany)
Peelian Principles: Policing by consent (UK)
Koban System: Community police boxes (Japan)
Dual System: Civilian + Military police (France)

Final Tip para sa board exam: Pag tinanong ka ng "What type of police system does the Philippines have?", sagot ay Centralized, Civilian, National Police System. Pag tinanong ka ng example ng decentralized, sagot ay United States (most fragmented).

Board Exam Tip: Memorize the type (centralized/decentralized) and one unique feature of each country's system. Common question: "Which country has the koban system?" Answer: Japan.