Suchergebnisse

In this article, we critically scrutinize the principle of proportionality when used in the context of security and government surveillance. We argue that McMahan's distinction from just warfare between narrow proportionality (cases in which a threatener is liable to suffer the harms inflicted upon him in the course of surveillance) and wide proportionality (involving harms inflicted on non-liable individuals) can generally apply to the context of surveillance. We argue that narrow proportionality applies more or less directly to cases in which the surveilled is liable and that the wide proportionality principle applies to cases characterized by 'collateral intrusion'. We argue, however, that a more demanding criterion than the lesser-evil justification that wide proportionality frequently entails is necessary in cases characterized by intentional intrusion upon non-liable individuals (e.g. some cases of mass surveillance). The distinction between foreseeing and intending intrusion into the lives of individuals who are not liable has not previously been specifically addressed in discussions concerning surveillance ethics. This specification is thus increasingly important due to the general growing tendency for adherence to the precautionary principle and policies aimed at anticipating criminal acts before they are committed. Preventive surveillance of non-liable actors is considered an important instrument for obtaining this aim and thus calls for moral scrutiny in terms of permissibility and proportionality. We suggest the concept 'wide proportionality +' which applies to cases of intentional intrusion of non-liable individuals.

"The core baseline of Intelligence-led Policing is the aim of increasing efficiency and quality of police work, with a focus on crime analysis and intelligence methods as tools for informed and objective decisions both when conducting targeted, specialized operations and when setting strategic priorities. This book critically addresses the proliferation of intelligence logics within policing from a wide array of scholarly perspectives. It considers questions such as: How are precautionary logics becoming increasingly central in the dominant policing strategies? What kind of challenges will this move entail? What does the criminalization of preparatory acts mean for previous distinctions between crime prevention and crime detection? What are the predominant rationales behind the proactive use of covert cohesive measures in order to prevent attacks on national security? How are new technological measures, increased private partnerships and international cooperation challenging the core nature of police services as the main providers of public safety and security? This book offers new insights by exploring dilemmas, legal issues and questions raised by the use of new policing methods and the blurred and confrontational lines that can be observed between prevention, intelligence and investigation in police work. "--Provided by publisher.

Abstract
The purpose of this article is to report from a qualitative Scandinavian study with the aim of shedding some light on how investigators in the Scandinavian police services perceive the use of information from social media in investigative police work. Based on 12 group interviews and 49 informants from Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish police services, we present three overarching themes mirroring the general perception amongst the interviewed investigators that: (1) information from social media is valuable in almost all types of crime investigation; (2) the use of social media information is fraught with technical pitfalls resulting in a general fear of making mistakes; (3) the legal frameworks governing digital investigative action are vague, leading to a feeling amongst the investigators of working in a grey zone. Overall, the informants express the view that this seemingly unregulated part of investigative work requires a major overhaul.

A current discussion about the role of research knowledge, particularly in Nordic police research, is concerned with research-funding collaborations being too entangled with political interests in documenting best-practices ("what works"), to maintain a trustworthy degree of critical and freely reflexive ethos. Whereas previous debaters find the solution to be one of researchers distancing themselves from their embeddedness with the police organisation they study in, we argue on the contrary that embedded, in-depth and close-up approaches are essential in producing rich enough knowledge from within the police to achieve critical and freely reflexive research-knowledge. In nuancing perspectives on the role and potential of embedded police researchers in contributing to knowledgeable policing, we suggest a framework for Embedded Police Research.