Are Civilian Review Boards a Good Idea?

Civilian review boards are seen by some as a necessary way to keep the police accountable to the public that they serve. Others feel the accountability needs to lie with the police chief and the supervisors in the police department. Alana W. Ennis and William H. Moulder debate this issue looking at both sides. Ennis is for civilian review boards, while Moulder is against them. Both authors make valid points in this debate.

Alana W. Ennis feels that civilian review boards are needed and necessary in order to preserve the image and accountability that police officers have to the public. Ennis cites many reasons for needing a citizen review board, especially in these days of community policing. The public needs to be certain that police misconduct is being dealt with appropriately, and the police officers themselves need protection from false claims from citizens. A citizen review board can ensure this is happening and that the police department is viewed as being uncorrupted and serving the public with integrity. Ennis writes, “Police chiefs have a choice: They can wait for an incident to occur with its attendant public unrest and subsequent mandate that a citizen review process be established, or they can take preemptive action” (p. 228). Very few cases would require a citizen review board, but by having one established those cases that do occur can be dealt with in the appropriate manner. For police departments to be seen as trustworthy by the public a civilian review board will sometimes be necessary. In order to ensure public satisfaction with the police department, Ennis feels a citizen review board is necessary.