Hur bemöter polisen? En studie om situationella konflikter utifrån anmälningar mot poliser

Abstract

This study analyzes complaints of police misconduct and relate them to issues of police legitimacy. Based in a theoretical framework of distributive and procedural justice, the study examines the situational properties of the complaints, and seeks to identify which police practices the complainers feel are improper. Data for the study was collected from the Swedish Bureau of Internal Investigations, and is primarily comprised of 100 complaints of improper personal treatment from 2013. These complaints are qualitatively analyzed and classified with a grounded theory-inspired methodology. The results indicate that the complaints adress either procedural issues – such as racist comments, unpleasant, provocative or dominant demeanor or unfair procedure, or distributive justice issues. Those classified as distributive justice complainers felt like they were singled out for policing based on their ethnicity, appearance or social life. A surprising number of complainers had tried to report a crime and been denied, which is discussed as an under-enforcement issue. This study indicates that a strict judicial processing of police misconduct complaints might not be satisfactory from a legitimacy perspective. Improper personal treatment complaints almost never make it to court, partly because it is not illegal for the police to be unpleasant. This study suggests that it can, however, influence police legitimacy. The study argues further that there is need of an agency where police misconduct complaints can be adressed from a restorative justice perspective. This paper adds to the literature on Swedish complaints of police misconduct, and differs from earlier research in the sense that is focuses on the situational content of the complaints, and describes them from the subjective perspectives of the complainers. Further, the study places the the complaints in a broader theoretical framework of police legitimacy.