MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRPERSON  

James M. O’Dell

Since the founding of our great nation, we have periodically been faced with enemies who threaten our peace and security.  In most cases, the foe was clearly defined, and centered abroad.  The American response has been to band together and undertake whatever action was necessary to protect our way of life.  During these periods of strife, Americans were sometimes required to accept domestic measures that, to one degree or another, affected their basic freedoms.  The American people were willing to do this because of the greater goal, our national survival.  History shows that these temporary restrictions, whether imposed or voluntary, in most cases did not harm the basic fabric of American life.  Where injustices did occur, efforts were undertaken to correct them.  The goal has always been to defeat the enemy, while preserving liberty and maintaining a healthy democratic society.

The tragic events of September 11^th have, unfortunately, revealed the United States to be in much greater jeopardy than, perhaps, we ever thought before.  We face an enemy – international terrorism – that attacks us both abroad and in our own backyard.  All of us, like it or not, have become combatants in this new war on terrorism.  A scattered, shadowy enemy that must be fought with military force abroad, as well as military force and law enforcement agencies at home, threatens us today. 

This new challenge may well involve the curtailment of some civil liberties.  Indeed, it already has.  Further, workplace surveillance, face recognition technology, national ID cards, fingerprint tracking, and other proposals are being seriously considered in government and corporate circles.  Now, it stands to reason that our civil liberties may be restricted to the extent that the benefits in greater security outweigh the costs in reduced liberty.  All that can reasonably be asked of the responsible legislative and judicial officials is that they weigh the costs, as carefully as the benefits. 

One way of insuring that our fundamental liberties are maintained and protected is to assure the integrity and trustworthiness of the basic institutions of American democracy, especially our law enforcement agencies and judicial system.  A population that is serviced by public safety agencies that have achieved CALEA accreditation is already at the forefront in the process of trust building. 

The procedures put in place during the accreditation process require that an agency open itself up to examination by both fellow professionals and the community it services.  CALEA strongly encourages public comment and participation at all levels and at all stages of the accreditation process.  The following requirements and procedures insure that public commentary will be open to all:

• It is CALEA’s policy to require agencies seeking accreditation to maintain a public accreditation file in their offices.  This file must be available for review by any citizen or employee who wishes to know more about the standards, and the agency’s involvement in the accreditation program.

   

• CALEA requires candidate agencies to post notices for the general public and agency employees within thirty days of the scheduled arrival date of the assessment team.  The notices provide an explanation of the purpose and scope of the on-site assessment, and inform both the public and agency employees that they have the opportunity to speak at the public information session, telephone to discuss relevant matters with the assessment team leader, send written comments, and review the Standards Manual and other accreditation file contents.

• Before the on-site assessment, CALEA requires each candidate agency to announce to the public through the major news media that it is seeking accreditation and that public comment is invited.  CALEA provides each agency with a sample news release to announce its candidacy and to invite public comment. The news release provides an explanation of the accreditation process and informs the public how they may discuss relevant matters with the assessment team or send written comments. 

• CALEA also requires candidate law enforcement agencies to provide a public information session on the first or second day of the on-site assessment.  This requirement does not apply to public safety communications and public safety training agencies.

• Finally, CALEA requires candidate agencies to provide the public and agency employees with direct, unrecorded telephone access to the assessment team to offer their comments. Public/agency employee telephone comments will be received on-site by the assessment team leader or leader’s designee at the scheduled times.  The telephone access will be for at least two hours during the on site, excluding the final day. In the case of a very large agency, e.g., state police or regional or national transportation police department, use of a toll-free telephone system may be substituted for the public information session.

All of these measures insure that the agency seeking accreditation opens itself up to public scrutiny and examination.  This willingness to be put under a microscope can only engender trust from the community as a whole.  It should be remembered that, as Attorney General John Ashcroft said at CALEA’s July 2001 Conference, “Standards Build Trust”, and the basis for accreditation is the application of over 400 such standards. 

In these perilous times, a concerned populous is more likely to accept some restrictions on civil liberties if they can feel assured that the law enforcement agencies they deal with most directly will be responsible and trustworthy in their actions.

Send mail to calea@calea.org with questions or comments about this web site
or write or phone us at: 10302 Eaton Place, Suite 100, Fairfax, Virginia 22030-2215, 800-368-3757
Copyright Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. 2008-All Rights Reserved.