Corruption In Law Enforcement

764 Words4 Pages
The phenomena of corruption in Law Enforcement Agencies (LEA) exists in every nation state, rich or poor, developed or underdeveloped but the difference only in degree an type of corruption. Behavior labeled “corrupt” due to be viewed as acceptable gift giving or “gratuities” by others. According to the “Global Standards to Combat Corruption” for the Interpol Member States, corruption includes the solicitation or acceptance, whether directly or indirectly, by law enforcement officer of money, article of value, gift, favor, promise, reward or advantage for accomplish the task in her or him job description. In other words, the unauthorized dissemination of confidential information whether for reward or otherwise. As mentioned earlier, corruption…show more content…
The “meat eaters” corruption generally involves in a small percentage of the enforcement agency aggressively seeking out situations which they can exploit for financial gain like case of narcotics, gambling, and other serious offences which could involve payments of thousands of ringgit. In other hand, the “grass eaters” are those who go after smaller amounts but more frequent transaction. Particularly by low-level public officials demanding “Speed-Money” to issue licenses or for getting away with the parking or traffic offences. However, nowadays many people no longer have a sense of shame when committing immoral-unethical acts. They not only flaunt them publicity but even go out to defend them as normal and correct to demand their right to be…show more content…
First of all, the cause of this was the enabling environment in Malaysia that involved in corruption. These include community attitude or tolerance for facilitating corruption, organizational policy and peer group support. Beginning with peer group support, the norm of secrecy within the police organization support solidarity and corruption. Sherman (1978) concluded that the community tolerance or even support for certain police/law enforcement agency corrupt behavior is itself facilitating corruption is atypical. Other than that, Skonlick (1967) described that the increase in bureaucratic-enabling regulations and the increase efforts to professionalize police discretionary innovation that evokes the administrative process of law. The more discretionary decision the police officer have, the more legal enabling environment there is for the police to commit corruption. Decision-making based on discretionary power is bound to be influenced by considerations of material or other
Open Document