In 2001, Peru began to reform its police force. How successful has it been? This study, by the Open Society Justice Initiative and the Instituto de Defensa Legal, focuses on internal and external impediments to police reform in Peru. It argues that there has been considerable innovation in the process of reform, but also serious setbacks. There are many different ways to evaluate success in policing reform. However, it is clear that important advances have been achieved even though the short-term impacts are limited.
Until recently, the police in Peru functioned as an instrument of social and political control for the authoritarian regime. The highly transparent and democratic reform process won public support and the backing of rank-and-file officers, but failed to overcome opposition from police leadership. The reason for this was that senior police officers had financial interests that were threatened by the anti-corruption initiatives. Another problem in the reform process was that the Interior Ministry reform team failed to produce a politically negotiated reform plan, and the president did not give his support at a critical moment when police challenged the Interior Minister.
It is clear that the effort to establish civilian control and democratic accountability of the police has a long way to go. Civilian expertise in security policy is lacking, corporatist habits in the national police institution remain powerful. Furthermore, creating civilian control of policing policies while avoiding old habits of manipulating policing operations for personal or party benefit remains a major challenge. Given the clear ramifications of police performance for government popularity, economic growth and for foreign relations, finding the correct balance between policy control and operational interference is a complex undertaking.
In Peru’s police reform, government weakness and lack of presidential support were the key obstacles to success. Other obstacles include the following:
- The fact that the reform team was politically independent meant that it failed to build broader political and government support. This also meant that the government failed to provide funding for the reform.
- The emphasis on democratic process built important support from the public and from the lower ranks of the police, but it was not enough to overcome the lack of presidential support.
- The focus on corruption attacked deeply vested interests that could not be overcome without political support from the government.
- Public awareness of and support for the reform did not translate into changed behaviour on the part of individuals in their relations with the police.
- The increase in public approval of the police had no significant impact on reported crime rates.
Nevertheless, although police reform in Peru cannot be considered successful, the initiative may have a lasting legacy:
- The achievements of the reform process were visible to the police, the public and opinion-makers in Peru.
- Police reform has been shown as an area in which effective management can produce important and relatively quick results.
- To produce deeper changes in police-community relations, concrete improvements in police service delivery are required.
