Social Media-Friendly Policing And Generation Z: A Conversation | Features

On February 3, 2022, Ghanaian journalist Eric Gyetuah faced an assault by a group of plainclothes police officers while filming them at a restaurant in Tanokrom, a suburb of Takoradi in the Western region of Ghana. This incident sparked immediate condemnation by the Ghana Journalist Association (GJA), which found it particularly alarming given that there have been a series of assaults on journalists in Ghana.

While these attacks were not committed solely by police officers, their involvement raised significant concerns, as law enforcement is expected to safeguard the citizens against such abuse. In response to Gyetuah’s case, the Inspector General of Police (IGP) contacted the victim, assuring him that there would be a thorough police investigation. However, as of the time of writing (July 2024), this ‘investigation’ has not yet been completed. This lack of transparency increases the distrust in the police’s internal accountability mechanisms and, as a result, some individuals wish to record officers in public spaces in order to obtain irrefutable evidence.

Regrettably, it seems that the case law arising from Solomon Joojo Cobbinah and Others V. Accra Metropolitan Assembly and Others (2017) Jelr 69501 (Hc) in Ghana, that affirms the citizens’ rights to film police officers in public places is either not widely recognised or ignored by the law enforcement officers. Additionally, attempting to justify the prevention of filming the police in public places under the State Security Act (1962) would be unreasonable, I think. However, my analysis delves beyond the legal arguments to explore the broader implications.

The courts in certain countries have established the right of their citizens to film the police in public places – with some reasonable guidelines. Even so, some tension remains between the police and the public in countries like the UK, where filming rights are firmly entrenched. Whereas the MET police chief thinks that such filming can on certain occasions be physically intrusive, escalate matters, and could deter potential recruits, his opponents are swift to refute such arguments, claiming that it is the right of citizens to gather evidence because of the history of the pervasive abuse of police powers by officers. Despite these differences, there is a consensus regarding the right of citizens to film officers in public places in such places.

However, attempts by some citizens to do so in some African countries may, unfortunately, result in physical abuse of grotesque proportions and other forms of (gross) rights violations by police officers, even when there exists no legal basis for preventing the citizens from filming. This discrepancy between the legal precedent and actual practice highlights broader issues concerning police accountability, respect for civil liberty, and the need for effective oversight mechanisms to ensure that individual rights are upheld in practice and theory.

Recently, such video clips taken by members of the public have played a significant role in bringing instances of police misconduct to both national and international attention, prompting action. Police supervisors cannot be everywhere, and such videos can help hold police officers to account for misconducts. The recordings of Rodney King and, decades later, George Floyd, were instrumental in elevating the discussion about police accountability and misconduct onto the global stage. Interestingly, some of this filming by citizens has benefitted the police, by catapulting officers to (inter)national prominence for their exceptional display of professionalism. 

There is also an interesting contrast from the standpoint of policing.  In some jurisdictions, police forces that attempt to utilize CCTV and facial recognition technology (AI) to combat crime have faced stiff resistance from segments of the public due to concerns about their indiscriminate and invasive nature.

Despite the pivotal role of videos in holding the police accountable for their actions, such recordings are often viewed negatively by law enforcement officers in certain African countries (including Ghana). This situation raises several questions: (1) Why are police-citizen relations so important? (2) Why do members of the public seek to film the police in public spaces? (3) What symbolic messages do the police’s responses to being filmed convey? (4) How can the police better adapt to responding to the public filming them in the era of social media and a youthful population?

In this piece, I will delve into the issue of filming police officers in public places and its implications for building police trust, legitimacy, and ultimately, the strengthening of Ghana’s national security.

The Current State of Police and Policing

Recent studies on the Ghanaian police further emphasize these challenges, highlighting significant issues related to public trust and legitimacy, as documented in the Afrobarometer report of 2024, the UNODC report of 2022, and Tankebe’s research in 2023. However, it is essential to acknowledge that these challenges are not unique to Africa. Globally, police forces grapple with the interconnected problem of low trust and legitimacy, which I refer to as the “conjoined police predicament.” These predicaments have prompted some citizens worldwide to advocate for radical reforms, including the controversial concept of defunding the police.

Why are police-citizen Relations so Important in a Liberal Democracy?

For a long time, police scholars have emphasized the significance of police-citizen interactions and their broader implications for policing, the rule of law, human rights, and democratic development/governance. In this context, Tom Tyler’s, concept of police-citizen interactions is helpful. For him, police-citizen interactions serve as teachable moments, creating opportunities for the police to educate the citizens. Since teaching is a two-way process, the police also learn from the citizens during such interactions. Following Tyler’s argument, instances of filming police officers in public places, I would argue, should be viewed by police officers as opportunities for enhanced dialogue and fruitful debate around policing – between the populace and the law enforcement officers for better governance including peace and security. More specifically, these dialogues could revolve around redefining the balance between safeguarding civil liberty and enhancing security in contemporary, times where Gen Z, for, instance, are firmly restabilising themselves in the governance (of the security and) of their respective states. Additionally, such teachable moments borne out of filming officers could provide the platform and space for constructive dialogue on police accountability, professionalism, and the role of technology in policing – with the aim of improving police efficiency.

In their metaphorical dialogue, Bottoms and Tankebe (2012) argue that building trust and legitimacy requires ongoing communication between the police (as the power holders) and citizens (as the audience), which they refer to as the dialogic process. In their view, this continuous dialogue enables the police to understand the citizens’ expectations and for them (the police) to present compelling justifications for their actions. For Bottoms and Tankebe, dialogic processes are fundamental for developing community policing principles, ultimately enhancing police trust and legitimacy. I tend to agree with them.

Conversely, a lack of meaningful dialogue risks undermining the trust in, and legitimacy of, the police, as valuable teaching opportunities are missed. In this vein, Sowatey and Atuguba have demonstrated that fostering healthy police-citizen relations enhances policing in low-income urban communities (such as Nima, in Accra, Ghana).

Why do members of the public wish to film the police in public places?

The public distrusts the police accountability mechanisms, especially when these are entirely internal. People believe that the police will not act against their own and there are reasons for that.

For instance, whistleblowing within police forces is notoriously challenging, with officers rationalizing this position as part of the culture. Police officers are socialized to cover up for each other or, at worst, to avoid reporting their colleagues, a phenomenon known as the blue code of silence.

In essence, the blue code of silence has fostered widespread mistrust in the ability of the police to self-regulate, fuelling calls for independent democratic oversight—a cause in which Generation Z view themselves as pivotal players. The convergence of Ghana’s (and Africa’s) youthful demographics with widespread access to electronic recording devices and social media has ushered in a new era, challenging the traditional norms in police-civilian relationships. Police often have difficult relationships with young people, hampered by mistrust. Lessons from an IDRC project (and other sources, e.g. The Missing Peace) show that, already, the youth feel pervasively “criminalized” by law enforcement officers (see, https://www.africansecuritynetwork.org/assn/idrc-youth-violence-exclusion-and-injustice/). So, this negative relationship does not auger well for police legitimacy and the entire criminal justice system in Ghana  (particularly because of the demographic heft of the youth).

However, my study with Tankebe on the police elite suggests that a significant number of police officers in Ghana do not seem to support an independent police commission – for now. To the best of my knowledge, the rare exception in the fourth republic has been Inspector General of Police Mr Mohammed Mohammed Alhassan and Mr David Asante Apeatu, who, while still in office as IGPs, openly supported the creation of an Independent Police Complaints Commission as a way to build trust in investigations of police complaints.

In recent decades, social media has revolutionized nearly every aspect of human life, exerting a significant influence. Its impact has created a pressing need for police and policing to embrace social media and prioritize ethical conduct, given the omnipresence of recording devices that are capable of providing incontrovertible evidence of any misconduct.

Ghana has a youthful population with access to mobile phones and social media. Filming has become a means to hold officers to account. Besides, unlike previous generations, who often acquiesced to authority without question, Generation Z exhibits a different mindset. They are less deferent to authority than previous generations, who often lived under military regimes, with few or no democratic rights. Generation Z are more inclined to ask probing questions and demand compelling answers. Moreover, they instinctively document police actions in public spaces, driven by a pervasive mistrust of the ability of police officers to hold themselves accountable. Filming the police behaving badly and sharing it online can be viewed as a retaliatory act as well as what they see as their democratic right.

This dynamic necessitates a transformative shift in the police-citizen relationship, rooted in mutual respect, robust accountability, and an ongoing dialogue. Such an evolution is essential for enhancing the trust in, and legitimacy of, the police, and, by extension, fostering an environment that is conducive to democratic consolidation.

What are the symbolic messages inherent in the police’s responses to being filmed?

The assault on journalist Eric Gyentuah by some officers from the Ghana Police Service is not unique. There have been several cases in Ghana where police officers have prevented citizens from filming or assaulted them for doing so in public places, despite the lack of any known legal basis for doing so. Such responses to public filming often occur when the police feel uncomfortable about their actions because, conversely, they welcome being filmed when acting appropriately. Assaulting or preventing the citizens from filming them reinforces the notion that the police seek to avoid robust accountability for their actions by covering up misconduct. The symbolic message sent by such actions is that the police will continue to act with impunity, without any regard for serious accountability, or that they do not recognise these rights. These attitudes ultimately undermine the trust in, and legitimacy of, the police in many ways.

What should a social media-induced police reform look like?

The traditional paradigm, where the citizens passively receive police instructions without question, is no longer sustainable in today’s demographic and technological landscape. As mentioned earlier, the youth are now more inclined to question and demand accountability from the police for their actions or inactions. Consequently, law enforcement can no longer assume that any misconduct will go unchallenged or use the old methods to cover it up. Instead, instances of filming in public spaces should be viewed as opportunities for a constructive dialogue between the police and the citizens, aimed at fostering healthier relationships. Such interactions serve as the cornerstone for building trust in, and the legitimacy of, law enforcement officers. 

The Ghana Police must consider how to reorient the traditional police-citizen relations. In doing so, they might consider some or all of the following factors:

1)      Developing social media-friendly courses, spearheaded by Ghanaian experts (in collaboration with others), that suit the Ghanaian context. These courses could be modelled and taught at all levels of the police hierarchy to reinforce consistently a new era of social media and the advantages and disadvantages of unfriendly social media comments on the legitimacy of, and trust in, the police. These courses could be taught by civilians (including seasoned journalists) and officers with the relevant pedagogic skills to achieve awareness among officers and gradually change the unfriendly culture and behaviour towards filming in public places.

2)      The police must strongly consider taking a positive view of filming as a potential source of information that aids police work and enhances their legitimacy.

3)      Perhaps more than ever before, the creation of an independent police complaints commission is urgently needed. This body would not be intended to undermine the police but to enhance its reputation, trust, and legitimacy.

4)      Police supervisors cannot be everywhere and they often rely on the public to bring misconduct to their attention.

5)      Legislation, that reinforces the court’s decision, on the rights of the citizens to film officers in public places may even be more helpful in beginning a gradual but seismic shift in citizen-police relations, that will enhance the police’s legitimacy and thus help to consolidate our democracy, rule of law and human rights.

6)      As a continent with diverse forms of governance, we must harness the qualities, creativity, and enthusiasm of the youth to enhance the oversight, accountability, and intelligence gathering regarding the police. These traits are vital in finding durable peace and development on the continent. In regions that face diverse security challenges, maintaining a positive relationship between the security forces and the public, who are predominantly youths, is paramount for promoting the peace, security, and development of the continent.

7)     As Hutchful puts it, security sector reform occurs within a specific political context and it ‘is fundamentally a process’. Everything about the police must be situated within a sociocultural and political context meaning we also have various roles to play as citizens and institutions.

I have deliberately left aside the growing role of the military in performing purely policing duties and what that portends for oversight and accountability. If we add, to the already challenging scene, a conversation about filming of the military performing purely police duties (with or without the police) in a liberal democratic state like Ghana, that opens a whole new kind of debate. I leave that discussion for another time; but let me hint at some of my preliminary thoughts.

In their latest book, Conflict: The Evolution of Warfare from 1945 to Ukraine(2023), General David Petraeus and historian Andrew Roberts argue that ‘often critical mistakes have been repeated time and again’ but that there is the need ‘for statesmen and generals alike to adapt to various new weapons systems, theories and strategies.’ I share their view and believe that their logical optics provide a useful conceptual framework through which armed forces and securocrates can examine Gen Z and social media within the context of ‘new weapons systems, theories and strategies’. Rather than abusing people who film them and straining their relationship with Gen Z, the Armed Forces should carefully strategize to win Gen Z on their side. For me, Gen Z is a core part of ‘new weapon systems, theories and strategies’ and we need to fully appreciate that.

Let me conclude with a recap. Globally, there still exists some level of dissonance between the police and the public regarding the right to film officers and the use of AI -which will increasingly become a core part of police work and policing in Africa. This calls for continuous dialogue on strengthening the core principles of policing in the era of Gen Z through meaningful participation of the various cohorts of youth. Thus, filming the police is far more than simply a policing issue. It holds wider relevance beyond purely legal issues and UNSCR 2250, 1325.

Eric Gyentuah’s case (which is symptomatic of such abuses of journalists and others ) reflects poorly on our human rights credentials and our oversight mechanisms (and governance) of the security sector.

In his Keynote Address at the Boston University School of Law Symposium, Justice for Hedgehogs: A Conference on Ronald Dworkin’s, in 2009, Dworkin makes several piercing statements about governance, one of which strikes me as particularly relevant in this context: ‘First, government must show equal concern for the fate of EVERY PERSON (emphasis added), every citizen over whom it claims dominion. I dare add that it is through this approach that the government (and state institutions) can enhance or undermine its legitimacy.

I write from the standpoint of a criminologist, and I hope that I made a modest contribution towards recentering the debate on police accountability, oversight and human rights in Ghana – that finds adequate traction on the ground. I urge other writers from different scholarly disciplines to weigh in on this.