Since the Garrisa terrorist incident, many Kenyans, from the President to the commoner in the street, are arguing that we need more cops to secure the country. Numbers have been bundled here and there, including the unconstitutional and illegal directive by the President.
In these faulty and uninformed arguments, some Kenyans want to confuse us that numbers, through recruitment of persons who were found to be culpable for corrupt activities, would solve Kenya's terrorist threats. The fallacious foundation of this discourse on numbers is, of course, what Kenyans term the UN ratio of police to public, where by increasing numbers we shall feel more secure.
Let us deal with numbers first, then the secondary issue of where to get the numbers, if the argument is valid, before we explain why numbers do not add up.
Do the math
First, police operations are carried out through either covert or overt policing. Recently, the Nairobi county commander for Kenya Police Service, mentioned in the dailies that he will increase those police who are undercover so that the terrorist and other threats reduce significantly. That is fallacious, as we argue below.
The number of overt police officers, all over the country, doing beat-and-patrol are evident to Kenyans since they are visible mainly in uniform and others without, termed 'plainclothes'. However, there is an interesting dimension, to overt policing. It is the issue of deployment, particularly police bodyguards.
There are many police officers guarding VIPs, and here we mean the President and his Deputy, the 47governors, the 349 members of the National Assembly, the 67 senators, Speakers of both Houses, the Chief Justice and the many Judges and sometimes Magistrates, Commissioners of the many constitutional commissions, the counties' MCAs, and so on. These numbers, in estimation, are at least 10,000 police officers. Do the math.
Second, there are many police officers doing administrative or other ancillary duties such as: doing customer care services at many police stations; recording incidences at the reporting desks of all police stations; they are doing reception duties at many of the VIPs offices, including most of the constitutional commissions; some are guarding the same offices, despite the presence of private security personnel; and also, others are giving lectures to current and future police in their respective colleges, among other duties.
Most of these duties that police are doing, borrowing from other counties around the world, could be done by civilians with no or little police training. For example, what is so difficult or police-based to ask a civilian who is trained to record incidents or complaints in the Occurrence Book? Why should control desks or call centres be filled with police officers? Why can't law graduates teach the 'grey book' set of laws? It beats logic.
Third, Kenyans are not calculating the attrition rates of police officers through separation from, or termination of, duty, such as retirements, resignations, dismissals, deaths, failed vetting and so on. Further, no one floating these numbers tells Kenyans how many police officers are on leave at any given time, whether that leave is terminal due to illness, incapacitation due to injury, those not in day or night shifts, compassionate leave due to loss of family, or even maternal or paternal leaves. Actually, who has the numbers of how many police officers are on duty per given day, week, or month. Hard to tell.
Numbers don't lie
Fourth, there are many police officers doing non-core duties, which they were never trained for. Forget the above issue of police bodyguards which many are not trained for anyway. Forget the issue of police doing reception work, at least that is decent work. Here, we are dealing with police officers doing menial jobs such as pushing carts for who-is-who in the supermarkets and shopping malls; milking cows in the village home of the VIPs; standing at the gates, all day, as guards in the private mansions of VIPs; those providing security in commercial banks, whether national or private banks; or even, those guarding government or state installations, such as government buildings, technological satellites, military or police equipments or buildings, and so on. Predictably, these number could be beyond 10,000. Numbers don't lie.
Fifth, they're are police officers who do work that is unrelated, at least directly, with securing Kenyans. These include traffic police officers who, whether or not traffic lights are working or roundabouts are being eliminated, they will still be on the roads, either assisting motorists navigate their way to work or home, extorting bribes from matatus, or simply hanging around the National Transport Safety Authority officials seeking rents from those seeping or speeding motorists.
A second category of these police officers, who work post-facto, after the tragic incidents have happened, do not also directly secure Kenyans and further their role is not known to the public including those in rapid deployment, the reconnaissance company, the others' services units, the criminal investigators, whether ballistics or forensics, who only spring to action when tragedy such as terrorism happens. Of course, while they do not guarantee security to all Kenyans walking in the street, their role is important. They are many and work behind the scenes, always reading, testing weapons, perfecting skills, or mixing chemicals in laboratories among others. Guess their number.
Conclusion
Fellow Kenyans, numbers are sometimes used wrongly to achieve a result. The result could not be genuine. But to fool people. So when the President, the Attorney General and all and sundry, including the Jubilee and Cord coalitions, argue that numbers are needed, you should first interrogate their wisdom, or lack of it, before supporting these warped-up arguments.
The arguments being fronted, that is, we increase police officers' numbers is a farce – so is the issue that numbers provide more security. Nothing could be further from the truth. The issue, perhaps that we could entertain, is what could be done to develop a deployment policy, for none notably exists, and agree how to station police officers where they are needed the most. If that is done, then we may start some policy debate. Otherwise, securing the country through more numbers through a corrupt-ridden recruitment, unconstitutional and illegal as it was ordered by the High Court, doesn't make sense. Numbers don't add up!
Board Member, Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA)
Originally published by The Star
www.doitadigital.com