THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL

SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL AND

ADMINISTRATIVE STUDIES

An Evaluation of the Impact of the Community Policing Strategy in Zambia: A

Case Study of Lusaka Urban District.

BY

VWAMBANJI MUSAMBA

SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA IN PARTIAL

FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER
OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

COMPUTER NUMBER: 58000561

Dedication
To My Wife Elizabeth Ngimu Musamba, My Daughter Nalwamba
Namusamba,My Mother Esther Nalwamba Musamba and My Late Father John
Luo Musamba.

i
 By

MR. VWAMBANJI MUSAMBA

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement of the Degree of Master

of Arts in Public Administration at the University of Zambia.

ii
 Declaration

I declare that this research topic has not been submitted for a Degree in this or any
other University.

iii
 APPROVAL BY EXAMINERS

NAME………………………………………………………………
SIGNATURE...……………………………………………………..
DATE……………………………………………………………….

NAME………………………………………………………………
SIGNATURE………………………………………………………
DATE………………………………………………………………

NAME…………………………………………………………………
SIGNATURE…………………………………………………………
DATE…………………………………………………………………

SUPERVISOR

NAME…………………………………………………………………
SIGNATURE…………………………………………………………
DATE…………………………………………………………………

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents
Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………………………………………………………...v
LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………………………………..vii
LIST OF ACRONYMS………………………………………………………..x
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……………………………………………………xii
ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………xiii

CHAPTER ONE………………………………………………………………..1
1.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………….1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ……………………………………………………2
1.3 Study Objectives……………………………………………………………..2
1.3.1 General Objective ………………………………………………………….2
1.3.2 Specific Objectives ………………………………………………………...2
1.4 Rationale ……………………………………………………………………..3
1.5 Conceptual Framework ………………………………………………………3
1.6 Literature Review ……………………………………………………………6
1.7 Methodology ………………………………………………………………...16
1.7.1 Study Area ………………………………………………………………...16
1.7.2 Materials and Methods ……………………………………………………16
1.7.3 Types and Sources of Data………………………………………………...19
1.7.4 Data Collection Method ……………………..……………………………19
1.7.5 Duration of Data…………………………………………………………..19
1.7.6 Data Processing and Analysis …………………………………………….19
1.7.7 Problems Encountered During Research………………………………….19

2.0 CHAPTER TW0: BACKGROUND AND EVOLUTION OF

COMMUNITY POLICING IN ZAMBIA……………………………………21
2.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………………… 21
2.2 Development of an Organized Police in Zambia …………………………...22
2.2.1 The Colonial Policing Strategies: 1891-1963 …………………………….22
2.2.2 The Post Independence Policing Strategies: 1964-1972 ………………….24
2.2.3 The Policing Strategies in the Second Republic: 1972-199 ….…………...26
2.2.4 The Policing Strategies in a Multi-Party Era: 1991-1994 ………………...27
2.3 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………..32

3.0 CHAPTER THREE: THE NATURE AND STRATEGIES OF

COMMUNITY POLICING IN ZAMBIA……………………………………34
3.1 Introduction.……..…………………………………………………………..34
3.2 The Nature of Community Policing in Lusaka Urban .......….........................35
3.2.1 Sensitization and Awareness of Community Policing ...………………….35
3.2.2 The Police Conduct and Accountability ………………………………….42
3.3 The Role of the Community in Crime Prevention…………………………...48
3.3.1 Neighborhood Watch Associations ……………….………………………50
v
3.3.2 Beat or Preventive Foot Patrols...………………………………………….55
3.3.3 Community Police Posts …………………………………..........................55
3.3.4 Sensitization Programmes..………………………………………………...56
3.4 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………..58

4.0 CHAPTER FOUR: THE IMPACT OF COMMUNITY POLICING IN

ZAMBIA…………………………………………….60
4.1 Introduction ...……………………………………………………………….60
4.2 The Impact of Community Policing on Crime in Zambia…………………...60
4.2.1 Changing Crime Levels …………………………………………………...61
4.3 Public Attitude towards Crime and the Police after CP…………………….76
4.4 The Challenges of Community Policing in Lusaka Urban…………………..91
4.5 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………..99

5.0 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS…100

5.1 Conclusions ...………………………………………………………………100
5.2
Recommendations.……………………………………………………………...103

Bibliography …………………………………………………………………...106
Appendices …………………………………………………………………….113

vi
 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Tables Page
1.1: Number of officers selected from Emmasdale police establishment 17
1.2: Number of officers selected from Woodlands police establishment 17
1.3: Background characteristics of the sample for members of the public 18
1.3: Number of respondents from the public selected from six residential areas 18
3.1: Members of the community and police officers perspective on CP 35
3.2: Members of the community and police officers perspective on public involvement
in community policing 38
3.3: Members of the community and police officers perspectives on training in
community policing 40
3.4: Members of the Community and Police Officers Responses on Meetings
Held Between Neighbourhood Watch Members and the Police 40
3.5: Classification of complaints received and dealt by the PPCA against
police officers in 2003 45
3.6: The classification of complaints received and dealt by the PPCA against
police officers in 2007 46
3.7: The classification of complaints received and dealt by the PPCA against
police officers in 2008 46
3.8: Members of the Community and Police Officers Responses on the
Neighborhood Watch Associations 52
4.1: Crime Statistics in 7 Categories of Crime in Lusaka Urban District Residential
Areas, 2007-2008 61
4.2: Cases reported and dealt by Woodlands Police Station in 2007, 2008 and 2009 63
4. 1: distribution of Burglary, House Breaking and Other Breakings in High, Middle
and Low Density Residential Areas of Lusaka Urban District before Community
Policing 64
4.4: The distribution of Burglary, House Breaking and Other Breakings in High,
Middle and Low Density Residential Areas of Lusaka Urban District
after Community Policing 65
4.5: The distribution of Theft, Robbery, and Aggravated Robbery statistics: High,
Middle, and Low density Residential areas of Lusaka urban district before
Community Policing 66
4.6: Distribution of Theft, Robbery, and Aggravated Robbery Statistics: High, Middle,
and Low Density Residential Areas of Lusaka Urban District after Community
policing 67
4.7: The distribution of Rape, Assault, and Murder statistics: In High, Middle, and
Low Densely Residential Areas in Lusaka Urban District before Community
Policing 68
4.8: Distribution of Rape, Assault, and Murder statistics: In High, Middle, and Low
Density Residential Areas in Lusaka Urban District after Community Policing 69
4.9: Comparison of Crime Rates in 1995, 2001, and 2009 at Emmasdale Police
Station after community policing 71
4.10: Responses from Members of the public and police officers on crime before and
after community policing 72
vii
4.11A: Responses from members of the public on the progress made in the fight
against Crime 75
4.11B: Responses from police officers on the progress made in the fight against crime 75
4.12: Summary on some of the responses on victimization and fear of crime 77
4.13: Victim’s Most Important Reasons for Not Reporting Cases to the Police 79
4.14: The Level of Security Concern from Members of the Community 79
4.15: The Level of Security Concern from Police Officers 80
4.16: Responses on Public Trust on Police Ability to Deal with Crime 81
4.17: Responses on Impact of Community policing on Police Performance and
Assistance to crime 82
4.18: Responses from the Members of the Community on the relationship
between the Police and members of the public 84
4 .19: Response from Police Officers on the relationship between the
Police and members of the public 85
4.20: Responses from Members of the Public on human rights observance 87
4.21: Responses from police officers on human rights observance 87
4.22: Responses on impact of community policing on crime reduction 88

Figures
4. 2: Bar Chart showing distribution of crime statistics levels, in Lusaka Urban
district residential areas, 2007 and 2008 62
4. 3: Bar Chart showing number of cases reported and dealt by Woodlands
Police Station in 2007, 2008 and 2009 63
4.3: Bar Chart showing distribution of burglary, house breaking and other
breakings in high, middle and low density residential areas of Lusaka urban
district before community policing 64
4.4: Bar Chart showing distribution of burglary, house breaking and other breakings
in high, middle and low density residential areas of Lusaka urban district after
community policing 65
4.5: Bar Chart showing the distribution of theft, robbery, and aggravated robbery
statistics: high, middle, and low density residential areas of Lusaka urban
district before community policing 66
4.6: Bar Chart showing the distribution of theft, robbery, and aggravated
robbery Statistics in high, middle, and low density residential areas of Lusaka
urban district after community policing 67
4.7: Bar Chart showing the distribution of rape, assault, and murder statistics in
high, middle, and low density residential areas in Lusaka urban district
before community policing 68
4.8: Bar Chart showing the distribution of rape, assault, and murder statistics in
high, middle, and low density residential areas in Lusaka urban district after
community policing 69

Viii
4.9: Bar Chart Showing Comparison of Crime Rates in 1995, 2001, and 2009 at
Emmasdale Police Station in Lusaka Urban District 71
4.10: Responses from the members of the public on crime before and after
community policing 73
4.11: Responses from Police officers on crime before and after community
Policing 73
4.12: Bar Chart Showing the Distribution of Victimization and Fear of Crime 77
4.13: Summary of some Responses on the Public Trust on the Police Ability 82
4.14: Responses on police performance and assistance on crime 83
4.15: Responses from the Members of Public on relationship between the police
and the public 85
4.16: Bar Chart Showing Number of Responses from the Community 87
4 .17: Effectiveness of Community Policing on Crime Reduction 89
4.18: Impact of Community Policing on Gender composition of the
Zambia Police Service 91

ix
 LIST OF ACRONYMS
OABH Occasional Assault Bodily Harm
ANC African National Congress
BSAC British South African Company
CBOs Community Based Organisations
CCPA Community Crime Prevention Association
CCPU Community Crime Prevention Unit
CID Criminal Investigations Department
CIO Criminal Investigations Officer
COPE Community Oriented Police Enforcement
CP Community Policing
CPF Community Policing Forums
CPOs Community Patrol Officers
CPP Crime Prevention Panels
CR Crime Register
CSOs Civil Society Organisations
CSU Community Safety Unit
CU Chaplaincy Unity
IG Inspector General of Police
MMD Movement for Multi- Party Democracy
NWAs Neighbourhood Watch Associations
OB Occurrence Book
OIC Officer in Charge
PPCA Police Public Complaint Authority
PRSP Public Service Reform Programme
RZ Republic of Zambia
SADC Southern African Development Community
SPOM School of Public Order Maintenance
SSG Special Support Group
UNIP United National Independency Party
x
USA United States of America
UTH University Teaching Hospital
VCS Voluntary Community Service
VIPs Very Important People
VSU Victim Support Unit

xi
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In the course of my research and preparation of this study, I was indebted to many
organizations and individuals whose assistance and contribution made it possible for me
to bring this work to an expeditious conclusion. Firstly, I am very grateful to the Zambia
Police Service through the Office of the Inspector General of Police for the permission
granted to access records and data from various Police Stations and Posts as well as from
individual police officers at various levels. Thanks also go to Police Public Complaint
Authority, UTH and Neighbourhood Watch Associations. Further, I acknowledge the
unfailing cooperation and input in various ways by members of the police service
especially in the selected Police Stations and Posts in Lusaka urban district. To all
members of the public from Woodlands, Kabulonga, Nyumba Yanga, Emmasdale,
Chaisa and Chipata compound communities I am deeply thankful for their cooperation
and warm attitudes during the collection of data. I extend my thanks to my supervisor Dr
Kaela for the valuable guidance and input in this work. Finally, I also want to record my
remarkable indebtedness to my wife and my family for their moral support.

xii
 ABSTRACT
The background to this study had its genesis from the fact that little was known about the
impact of community policing strategy on the objectives set by the Zambia Police in
1995. The main purpose of the study, therefore, was to conduct a situation analysis and
determine the extent or impact of the community policing on crime as well as on the
public attitude towards crime and the police in selected communities of Lusaka urban.
The study also examined the policing strategies in the colonial period (1891-1964) and
the policing strategies that were employed by the Zambia police in the first, second and
the early years of the third republic. In addition, find out factors if any, that hindered the
implementation of community policing and possible measures to address hindrances so as
to effectively implement community policing strategy programmes in selected
communities of Lusaka urban district.

The study evaluated police data from 1993-2009, for 2 police stations and 4 police posts
retrospectively from Emmasdale and Woodlands police stations, Chipata, Chaisa,
Kabulonga and Nyumba Yanga police posts with permission of the Zambia Police
Service as well as data from Police Public Complaint Authority. The Sample was
collected from three categorized areas of high densityy populated communities of Chaisa
and Chipata compounds; Middle density populated communities of Emmasdale and
Nyumba Yanga residential areas as well as in low density populated areas of Kabulonga
and Woodlands residential areas. Two hundred and fifty (250) respondents constituted
the Sample.

Field work included the distribution of questionnaires to 100 police officers using
systematic random procedure at the two (2) police stations and four (4) police posts
randomly selected in Lusaka urban and 130 members from the 6 randomly selected
communities of Lusaka urban using simple random sampling procedure to select
respondents in the sample. Purposeful sampling procedure on 20 key informants using in-
-depth interviews with officials within the Zambia Police Service, Neighbourhood Watch
Association members, UTH Public Relations Office, Chaisa Resident Development
Committee and Police Public Complaint Authority.

The findings of the study clearly indicated that despite the implementation of community
policing programmes in these communities in the last 15 years, police has failed in many
areas for instance, members of the public are in many instances not aware and involved in
community policing, the reduction of crime by 50% as indicated in Zambia police reform
objectives has not been achieved and over 95% police officers are not directly involved
and not even trained in community policing. On the contrary, however, the findings of
the study on community policing regarding police performance, police relationship with
the public and police human rights observance, the study results shows the police have
greatly improved.

xiii
However, the performance of community policing programmes in Zambia remains
hindered by a myriad of factors including the exponential growth of corruption,
centralization and erosion of law. Further, the police are faced with operational problems
and lack resources such as transport, equipments and communication facilities, and
inadequate office space, manpower, and training. Further, the inadequacy of legal
document to back community policing and a weak practice of accountability measures,
poor conditions of service, politicization of the Zambia Police Service and lack of
professionalism are major contributing factors to the current inefficiency of the police
service and the inability of the police to manage crime effectively.

The respondents, however, suggested the following measures to effectively implement

community policing in Lusaka urban: It is important that the police service must look
into the current nature of community policing which makes it difficult to fully involve the
community and put in place sensitization/communication, coordination and cooperation
measures as well as accountability mechanisms. The changes required for the roles on
institutional character of the Zambia police and its crime policy can only be realized if
the citizen’s values are taken into consideration. Working relationships need to change as
well within the police service and within the community to allow the flow of information
and to remove the feeling of superiority or inferiority among officers and citizens. Police
officers must also change their attitude towards each other and towards the public which
is a precondition for rebuilding confidence and providing security to the society. Further
leaders should also show the political will to ensure compliance with the community
policing by allocating appropriate resources to the Zambia Police Service to ensure they
have adequate trained manpower, office space, operational equipment and transport.
Consequently, future police reform programmes should take all these factors into account
when aiming to transform the Police Service totally.

xiv
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The ever increasing crime rate in Zambia is a serious problem that needed to be attended
to urgently. Today, every family and business has been directly or indirectly affected by
robberies, burglaries, vandalism, sexual and other crimes. The significant increase in
criminal activities impairs the overall development of a nation, undermines people’s
spiritual and material well-being, compromises human dignity, and creates a climate of
fear and violence that erodes the quality of life. Therefore, Sound Police - Community
Relations are indispensable in the fight against crime in Zambia. Without adequate
involvement by the local communities in fighting crime, for example, police officers are
not likely to succeed in their endeavors (Baker, 2008).
From the time of independence in 1964 to 1994, the Zambia Police Force, like many
police organizations all over the world was using the Professional Model of Policing also
known as the Crime Fighting Model or Traditional Approach Model which dominated the
conception of the police function and the approach to organizing Police Forces and
bureaucracies since the 1950s (Goldstein, 1990). In this model of policing, the key roles
of the police were crime fighting, maintenance of law and order, and emergency
response. Therefore, it focused the police agencies inwards than on building a symbiotic
relationship with the community. Hence during this time the Zambia Police Force was
militaristic whose main role was to ensure civil order. This eruditive police force by its
nature was reactive rather than interactive or proactive. Therefore, it was claimed that
traditional approaches to crime control were characterized by limited involvement from
the public. Basically there was over reliance by the public on the police for protection and
fighting crime problems (Hatchard and Ndulo, 1994).
With the crime fighting model in place, the crime rate continued to rise in Zambia
which made the policing strategy inappropriate. As a result in 1994, the Zambia Police
decided to embark on Police Reforms with the aim of making the police more efficient in
preventing and fighting crime by transforming it from a force to a service. In 1995 the
Zambia Police Service came up with the Strategic Development Plan (SDP) for the
period 1995-2000, following the Zambia Police Reforms. The aim of the strategic plan
was to spell out the way forward for the Zambia Police in order to suit with the emerging
democratic principles obtaining in the country. The purpose of the Police Reforms was to
come up with a community friendly and professional police, able to combat the high
crime rate whilst respecting individual human rights. This would subsequently bridge the
gap between the police and the community.

According to the Strategic Development Plan (1995-2000), the Zambia Police Reforms
general objectives were:

• To reduce rising levels of crime, especially, violent crime by 50% by the year
2000;
• To reduce the Human Rights Abuses by half by the year 2000.
• To improve the Public Image of the Police.
• To improve Public/Police Cooperation and Partnership.
As the main strategy for fulfilling the objectives, the Zambia Police Service adopted the
Community Based Policing Model of law enforcement. Musonda (2002) explains that the
model was adopted because of its ability to address a specific citizens concerns and its
demand for change and resource accountability. Community policing is based on the
premise that the partnership between the police and citizens will help increase public
safety and reduce crime. There is need for innovative approaches to fighting or
preventing crime that may call for extensive community cooperation, planning, and
outreach. Therefore, community policing requires shared ownership, decision making and
accountability. This is what is referred to as the Partnership Approach. Overall,
community policing model has a positive impact on reducing crime, helping to reduce
fear of crime and enhancing the quality of life in the community (Adler, 1995:423).

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

In 1995 the government of Zambia, through the Zambia Police Service, adopted
community policing strategy in which crime prevention through community participation
and partnership with the police was emphasized. Despite the strategy being in place for
over 15 years, there were indications that the situation on the ground was not in harmony
with the Zambia Police Reform objectives. The crime in Zambia appeared to be
increasing and the evidence that crime was going up is readily available through the
public out cry on various news media and other fora as well as the Zambia police crime
statistics. The Zambia police official crime statistics provided by the Victim Support Unit
(VSU) show that reported violent crimes against women and children increased steadily
between 1998 and 2004. For instance, reported cases rose from 473 in 1998 to 32479 in
2004 and this upward trend applied to other crimes. Further the police statistics show
increased numbers of reported crime in Lusaka Province rose by more than 50% between
2003 and 2007. For example, reported cases rose from 25419 in 2003 to 66538 in 2007
(Victim Support Crime Statistics, 2008). Therefore, the study highlights the emergence of
community policing strategy with a particular focus on crime prevention and in the
process evaluating the success and failure of the community policing strategy in fighting
crime and the attitude the citizens have today towards crime and the police.

1.3 STUDY OBJECTIVES

1.3.1 General Objective

To investigate the impact of community policing strategy on crime prevention, and the
public attitude towards crime and the police in Zambia.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

Specific objectives of the study are:

• To identify and examine the types of community policing programmes put in
place to fight crime in Zambia.
 • To assess the impact of community policing programmes in enhancing crime
reduction, and to see the change in public attitude on crime and the police in
Zambia.
• To state and examine the factors that have negatively affected the effective
implementation of community policing strategy in Zambia

1.4 RATIONALE

This study would be beneficial to the Zambia Police Force because not much study has
been conducted to unearth factual information on the impact of Community Policing
Strategy in Zambia. The information on the impact of community policing strategy would
help the police command to plan effectively for appropriate management strategies on
crime. The study results would also act as an impetus or catalyst to the Ministry of Home
Affairs, the Police, Law makers and other partners in the policing of crime to plan for a
holistic approach in the management of crime. Management of crime should look beyond
the curative and reactive strategies but should include appropriate pro and core-active
management crime strategies. It would also serve as a data base for further research on
the gaps identified by other scholars.

1.5 CONCEPTUAL/ THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Over the centuries three institutions of policing have been constantly active. There are the
local collective voluntary policing alongside informal communal control: it sees local
solutions as the answer to local problems and may function on the basis of rules and
values at variance with the state. Then there is client based contract policing as
individuals specializing in policing offer their services on a fee basis. Finally there is a
public policing that offers to serve all on the basis of state law. The community, business
and the state have constantly been the authorizers and providers of policing.
With all the new developments in policing, plus the continuation of order traditions of
self provision, theorizing has struggled to keep pace with reality. The mid-19th century
ideology of policing, that it was a public good and therefore deserved a state monopoly,
was largely unchallenged intellectually until the early 1990s. It was regarded as self-
evident that the functions such as regulating society and maintaining order, preserving
security, preventing crime and restoring order, and the use where necessary of
instruments of coercion to assist any of these were matters for the state to undertake and
the state alone. Only in the state’s hands, it was argued, could policing activities be
required to be accountable, consistent and humane. Thus, what had only been the
experience for several years in the West, was regarded as ‘natural’ and ‘right’, whilst the
longer historical pattern of diversity and plurality by non-state authorizers and providers
was unimaginable. Those proposing its revival were vilified as promoting morally
suspect vigilantes, mercenaries and commercial interests (Baker, 2008).
However, today the ‘state monopoly’ discourse does not fit people’s experience in the
society, which is one of multiple authorizers and providers. In Africa, where the post-
colonial state has always been much weaker than in the West, this is even more the case.
Faced with an absent, inefficient, corrupt and at times brutal state police service, citizens
never cease to provide their own local solutions and have initiated new forms with or
without the approval of the state. State approved community –based policing can include
customary structures, Neighbourhood Watch Groups, Community Policing Forums,
Local Government Crime Prevention Bodies, Vigilantes and Street Patrols. Today in
Africa, it is common to see non-state agencies engaged in street patrolling, guarding
private and public property, order maintenance, arrest, search, detection, surveillance,
inspection and personal escort/protection. In fulfilling many of these duties they
commonly bear firearms and other means of coercion, such as handcuffs, truncheons and
pepper spray to, if necessary, enforce their activities. In other words such policing groups
do everything that the public police force does and do it as the police do it. Or, put
another, law enforcement is broader activity than simply what “The Police’ do”.
It can be argued, therefore, that policing has to look beyond the state and beyond the
formal. As Hills rightly observes, ‘the focus should be on policing (as in the provision of
order and enforcement) rather than on what organizations call themselves. How the
police style themselves is less important than what they do or do not do’ (Hills, 2001).
The failure to recognize the difference between policing and police, leads to popular
assumption ‘that any solution to the governance of crime/fear will, inevitably, be a state
led alone’ (Johnson, 2001:959). Stimulated by the argument that policing is not
synonymous with the police, some have stretched the concept of policing to mean
communal control in all its forms. However, when this is done, the term is left explaining
everything and nothing. In response to this, Reiner argues that policing involves ‘the
creation of systems of surveillance coupled with the threat of sanction directed at
preserving the security of a particular social order (Reiner, 1977:1005)
The purposive element is the necessary part of the definition, but it is not sufficient.
For example, it still leaves the issue of whether policing must involve ‘a conscious
exercise of power’, as Jones and Newburn claim (1998:18). In addition, it can be argued,
as does Shearing, that policing fundamentally is not so much about the exercise of
power/coercion as about the establishment of security and peace; security being the
preservation of some established order against threat (Shearing, 1992). This thinking
underlies the Community Policing Strategies being implemented by the Zambia Police
Service.
Therefore, policing in this formulation is not only about a network of agencies and
community groups rather than about a single state police force, but clearly focused on
governance rather than coercion. Johnson also supports this security emphasis, on the
grounds that it is wider than crime and reflects people’s concern for more than just
protection from crime. He defines policing as ‘a purposive strategy involving the
initiation of techniques which are intended to offer guarantees of security to subjects’
(Johnson, 1999a: 178-79). The advantage of putting security, peace and order at the
center of what constitutes policing is that it removes policing from being an exclusively
criminological activity, confined to the domain of criminal justice. Crime is only one
source of people’s insecurity (Ibid: 178-79). The security framework is also a reminder of
why the state police service is only one provider of policing and can never be the sole
one.
Acknowledging the arguments that policing contains the elements of purpose action
and the provision of security, the study intends to use the following definition of policing.
Policing can therefore, be defined as any organized activity, whether by the state or non-
state groups, that seek to ensure the maintenance of communal order , security and peace
through elements of prevention, deterrence, investigation of breaches, resolution and
punishment (Baker, 2008). While on the other hand, according to Reiner, Police refers to
social-political and quasi legal institutional state agencies charged primarily with the
enforcement of the law, the maintenance of order and community service (Reiner,
2000:2-3).
There are many perspectives that try to explain the evolution of the police and
policing conceptually. Several related conceptual frames have been suggested in recent
years and although some were primarily proposed with the Western world in view, they
still have value in explaining the nature of the Zambia Police Force and its policing
strategies. The first may be called Neo-Feudalism where private and public policing are
sharply divided, with the former being primarily concerned with commercial security. It
is an order where the ‘undesirables’ have been excluded through methods other than law
and largely through the consensus of participants and the design of the environment.
Therefore, the neo-feudal frame suggest a clear-cut separation between private and public
orders of policing that did not fit the world of overlapping and cooperative patterns of
security (Shearing and Kempa,2000).
The second conceptual frame is the Multilateral Policing. Bayley and Shearing (1996)
argue that policing is authorized by a variety of sponsors: economical interests (formal
and informal, legal and illegal), residential communities, cultural communities,
individuals and governments. Further on the one hand, a variety of non-governmental
organizations have assumed responsibility for their own protection, whilst on the other
hand a variety of non- governmental agencies have undertaken to provide services. It has
also been noted by Johnston (2001: 965), commenting on the active role of citizens in
both authorizing and providing policing. Citizens rather than being the passive consumers
of police services, engage in a variety of productive security activities. Such co-
production ranges from individual/ household activities with police cooperation, group
activities supported by the police (liaison groups, neighborhood watch groups), to those
denied such support (hiring a private security patrol to protect a group of residences,
engaging in citizen patrol). Therefore, in their view policing is diverse, though both
public and private policing have significant differences, nevertheless they have important
features in common. They are both forces of coercion engaged to preserve internal
communal order and they draw on similar control and investigative techniques. It is then,
increasingly hard to separate them analytically.
A third conceptual frame is the one proposed by Loader called plural networked
policing (Loader, 2000). This conceptual frame, like the multi policing recognizes that
the state is not (and cannot be) the sole source of both the provision and accountability in
policing, but emphasizes the relationship and co-operation between the diverse policing
groups. In other words it is not just that the boundaries between the state and non-state
institutions have ‘blurred’ but they have been transformed by new partnerships. Though
diverse, Loader argues that policing groups are not to be seen as isolated autonomous
groups, but as together providing a security network across society. He talks of the
network of power in which the state is but one node (Ibid, 2000).
This is the frame that recognizes a multiplicity of state, market and community groups
loosely networked to provide shared control order and authority. Policies of partnership
take plural- network policing as an opportunity to extend order and security. Though
many nodes are acknowledged, this frame assumes the primary of state law and still
regards the government as the primary node. These security networks tend to be defined
in terms of the variable relationship with the state. It is now common to see governments,
who until recently labeled citizen participation in policing as Vigilantism, encouraging
citizen participation in self policing schemes like Neighborhood Watch. However, it can
be argued that the prominence of the state may well fit current Western patterns, but in
Africa and other parts of the developing world, where the state police are largely absent
in the rural areas and poorer neighbourhoods of the towns, this paradigm is
unsatisfactory.
It can then be argued that, despite the inadequacies, this conceptual frame still
underpins contemporary debates about the police and policing the communities in a
democratic society through community policing.

1.6 LITERATURE REVIEW

Much academic literature on policing constructs the choice as one between accountable
public policing and minimally accountable private policing (Stenning, 2000). However,
for Africans their experiences are ‘what is available’, ‘what works best’ and ‘what is
affordable’, more than issues of who controls the policing body and to whom are they
accountable. Within this view, it can then be argued that these security terminologies
become problematic as popular understandings give different shades of meaning or
different applications. Thus ‘public’ and ‘private’ do not exist as straightforward terms in
popular experience. Public policing not only fails to serve all equally, but neither is it
free. For instance, to secure interest, investigation and prosecution of a criminal case may
well necessitate people offering bribes. Further, daily encounters with public policing at
roadblocks and at roadside vending pitches is costly, mostly the offenders have been
forced to bribe the police.
Policing has always existed and communities everywhere have sought to maintain
order to correct and discipline those who depart from community accepted behavior. In
the largely rural population of pre-industrial Europe, for instance crime control and
maintenance of order was a local community affair. Policing was fulfilled by collective
task and sometimes also through Voluntary Community Service (VCS) on rotation basis
(as constables, a watchman, and patrols) (McMullan, 1987).
There has been no any ideal policing model for African Police Forces because the
position of the state in most African countries has been very fragile. Traditionally,
however, most police forces all over the world have been using the Professional Model of
Policing which dominated the conception of the police function and the approach to
organizing police services and bureaucracies since the 1950s (Goldstein , 1990). August
Vollmer, the proponent of the professional model is one of the most prominent figures in
the history of police and policing. A professional police had to be non- political, well
recruited, well trained, well disciplined, and equipped with modern technology; members
were to be part of the civil service, selected and advanced by merit. However, while the
pioneers were professionalizing police forces, many police forces were corrupt,
superficial in training and inadequate training.
The police officer’s major role in profession model of policing are: crime fighting,
maintenance of order and emergency response (Adler, 1995). However, it can be argued
that these three police functions may be considered to be in conflict under the
professional police system. For example, the conflict that may arise between law
enforcement and order maintenance is that promotion and recognition of professional
achievements are primarily based on measurable productions, such as the number of
arrests, convictions and traffic tickets issued. This tendency is believed to discourage the
performance of social services functions of the police. It can further be critically argued
that police role and functions seem to be moving in the direction of paramilitary and
political police, expanding the repressive and coercive role of police.
Furthermore, the proponents of community policing argued that professional model of
policing ignored the factors that most communities regarded as a priority (Brogden:
2004). For instance, they argued that as policing became more professional, increasing
emphasis was placed on crime fighting (the law enforcement models) and less on the type
of policing that enhanced harmonious relations within the community, reduced fear of
crime and fostered cooperation between citizens and police (the order maintenance
function) (Adler, 1995) .
Therefore, it may be argued that despite professional policing model being challenged
in the 1960s, in the wake of civil unrest, the functions of the police in Africa (Zambia)
have always been closely linked to the development of the state because the police play
such a vital role in the relationship between central political authority and the population.
Most governments have had militaristic police forces whose main role was ensuring civil
order .To do this, they had to use excessive violence and brutality to quell down any
opposition to the political authorities (Mohamed, 2002). This as agued by Reiner (2000),
contributed to the ineffectiveness of professional or fighting model to have a significant
impact on crime rates or on individual or community safety and security. Hence
proponents of Community Policing Model claim that traditional or professional model of
policing had simply failed to deliver the goods and that community policing is the
evolutionary response.
Further it may be argued that the successful performance of the law enforcement,
maintenance of order, and community service functions required that the police had the
trust, respect and cooperation of the public. Yet good police- community relations had all
but vanished during the era of professionalization. Therefore, the most widely accepted
model for improving police-community relations to fight crime is that of Community
Policing. Community policing generally consist of programs and policies based on a
partnership between the police and the community they serve. Some observers used the
term “community wellness” to describe the philosophy behind this kind of policing.
According to Cordner and Trojanowkz (1992:11), the emphasis of community policing is
on working in collaboration with residents to determine community needs and the best
way to address them and to involve citizens as “co–producers of public safety”.
Among the goals of community policing are a reduction in fear of crime, the
development of closer ties with the community, the engagement of residents in a joint
effort to prevent crime and maintain order, and an increase in the level of public
satisfaction with police services. Skolnick and Bayley (1988) argued that many types of
strategies were described as community policing, including increased use of Foot Patrol,
Storefront Police Stations (Police Posts), Community Surveys, Police Sponsored Youth
Activities, Police-Community Relations Programmes and Neighborhood Watch
Programmes.
 Community policing may appear to be new in the Zambian context of policing but on
the world scene community policing is neither new nor unique. Other countries have
much more active programmes in community policing than what is currently obtaining in
Zambian. In Japan for example, officers are stationed in a mini–police station called a
Koban in each neighborhood this can be related to police posts in Zambia. The Koban has
a reception room, a small kitchen, an interview area, and a lost and found service; it
serves the important function of soliciting recommendations for what the police might do
to help the community. Further, Norway, Singapore and the USA also have such mini-
police stations (Adler, 1983). Therefore, the idea behind this approach is that the
communities have different needs and priorities that the police have to be aware of if
efforts to prevent crime are to be effective.
Policies of partnership like community policing as indicated, take plural networked
policing as an opportunity to extend order and security. However, the challenge is to
work with a range of policing groups so that they perform a genuine service to society
and not to become too independent and self- serving. For many policy-makers co-
operation means “community policing” that will bring together the police closer to the
people since “the police cannot win the war against crime alone” (Shearing and Wood,
2003). By way of illustration, attention is drawn to government initiatives to
‘Voluntarise’ and ‘Civilianize’ security provisions so called “responsibilisation
strategies” to encourage individuals and organizations outside state apparatus to take
responsibility for crime prevention and security (Newburn, 2001).
There can be no doubt that community policing has been popular with the public and
the Zambia Police. In practice, however, community policing is primarily seen as a policy
of enhancing the state police and remains ‘police property’ (Reiner, 2000), that is, a
police-led and state centered initiative against crime and disorder. This has led to
frustrations on both sides for instance, it may be argued that the public are not engaged in
problem identification, prioritisation and solving. Further, it may be argued that the
police see crime prevention associations as time consuming in consultation and too
threatening to their management and operational independent. Furthermore, it may also
be argued that state police in African set up are often reluctant to let civilians meddle in
‘their’ domain, or closely scrutinize how the police operate. More fundamentally, the
very concept of ‘community’ is problematic. In reality the community is not uniform,
definable entity: communities are extremely divided with little commonalities in terms of
needs and aspirations. Community implies shared beliefs and values; directly; many sided
relationships between members; and reciprocity. But given Africa’s (Zambia’s)
frequently divided and fragmented societies, it is not certain whether such relationships
exist. Yet the logic of community policing assumes communities to be form of
association capable of informal social control. It assumes that the shared values can be
used to regulate individual activities for the common good. In addition, there are issues as
to whether all communities have the social capital to effectively undertake informal
control (Baker, 2008).
Given the limitations of police service in Zambia, it is inevitable that citizens will
mobilize to play a role in keeping law and order and implementing anti-crime strategies.
Therefore, in the last 15 years Zambia police has undergone a number of positive reforms
aimed at enhancing its effectiveness to fight and reduce crime. The Zambia police for
example, introduced community policing in 1995, and this was in line with their mission
statement. According to Zambia Police Strategic Development Plan (1995-2000), their
mission statement stated that,

“We, the Zambia Police Service are committed to providing high quality service, by
upholding and applying the law fairly and firmly to all. We will apply pro-active methods
to prevent crime, arrest those who break the law and take them to court and assist the
victims of crime through counseling. We are committed to cultivating rapport with the
community.
We pledge to respect individual human rights while recognizing the community’s
expectations and obligations.
We are committed and will review our roles and are ready to change our approaches to
law enforcement methods where necessary, in order to facilitate good democratic
governance, while upholding our professional standards and ethics.”

In Zambia, several police initiatives have been described as community policing

varying from Beat Patrol to Neighborhood Watch Group Patrols, Community Police
Posts, Village Policing Schemes, Citizen Crime Prevention Units and Sensitization and
Awareness Programmes (Musonda, 2002). But it is not clear that these initiatives deliver
the quality of service that the Zambia Police Service seek in their mission statement or
that they were ever intended to do so. It may be argued that the Zambia Police Service
faces the dilemma of how to deliver quality service acceptable to the community, while
simultaneously exerting a coercive force over that community to maintain order. As one
commentator suggests that quality service is a mare cloak for the coercive function of the
police and does not eliminate it (Brown, 1988).
However, this criticism could be evaded if quality service consistently were linked to
consent and accountability and not to response time and image as is often the case.
Current initiatives will be unlikely to succeed if they are arrived at without community
consent, consultation or internal support. But can this be achieved when trust and
confidence in the police have fallen and civil rights issues have grown, when the media
increasingly question the police role? Objections are also made to any assumption that
the community is one homogenous group; there are many communities or “customers of
the police,” each with its own profile, hopes and expectations, and needs.
If policing in the Zambia police service is now primarily measured by provision of
quality service, one must define both quality and service. Quality means an excellence of
deposition, a mental or moral attribute, trait or characteristic, an accomplishment or
attainment. It relates to professionalism, and varies from best to acceptable, unacceptable,
and worst. In management terms, quality is the result of a carefully constructed cultural
environment. It must include the whole organization, not just part of it. Services of good
quality often assume to be customer driven, meeting customers’ agreed requirements at
lowest cost, first time and every time (Crosby, 1990). Quality should be an ongoing
process, always aiming to improve. Achieving this requires cultural change through
training, planning, identifying and understanding customer needs and expectations, and
developing a process for their accomplishment. But considering the current state of the
Zambia police service, is it able to meet all the mentioned requirements to satisfy the
community needs? The response is negative. Therefore, ‘quality in policing might be
defined as the totality of features or characteristics of a police service that bear on its
ability to satisfy a given need; in other words, the provision of the right service at the
right time, and at a reasonable price’ (Ebbe, 1996).
A ‘service’ on the other hand, is a branch of public employment or body of public
servants concerned with some particular work or supplying particular needs (Ibid,1996).
The Zambia police service serves the sovereign, the state, and the community. They also
serve to enforce laws and maintain order as representatives of the community. However,
it should be argued that this last point is not universally agreed on. Some insist that the
police role is law enforcement and order maintenance only that, “such a role (service)
does not belong to the police work (Kinsey, Lea, and Young, 1986). This point of view
gains support from a number of police officers who do not regard service jobs as ‘real’
policing. Some may think that the main job for the police service is coercive action, but
one must also take account of how the Zambia police themselves view their role. The
following are the key service areas of the police: (1) public contact management; (2)
crime management; (3) traffic management; (4) public tranquility; and (5) community
partnership and reassurance.
However, it could be argued that demand for community services from the police
must be balanced against demands for police coercion and readiness to meet conflict,
successful police services will combine these two. Only once this balance has been
attained will quality considerations enhance the service provision. Goldstein argues that
the ultimate objective for all efforts to improve the police is to increase capacity to
deliver high quality service and equip police to do so in ways which are consistent with,
and support, democratic values (Ebbe, 1996).
In the early 1970s a community policing strategy called team policing became a
popular way to enhance contacts between citizens and police. Team policing has been a
response to the riots in the inner cities, the perception of the police as an army of
occupation and the limited familiarity on the part of officers with the needs of the
neighborhoods they served. According to Adler (1995), the proponents of team policing
hoped that if the image of the police is changed from that of an enemy to that of a friend,
law enforcement activities would be a great deal more effective. Further, other experts
argue that, team policing has indeed helped to encourage crime control through better
police-community relations because in team policing, a team of officers, rather than
individual officers, carries out the policing responsibilities (Kenney, 1972). Nevertheless,
team policing can be critiqued on the basis whether it really differs much from routine
patrol activities. Therefore, it is difficult to determine its effectiveness on the prevention
of crime or on the increased number of crime problem solved.
Another way in which police can enhance community relations is through problem
oriented policing. In problem solving approach, police work with citizens to identify and
respond to community problems. The proponent Herman Goldstein (1990) warns that
police too often focus on specific incidents. Their objective is to get to places fast to
stabilize the situation and to get back into service quickly. But Goldstein argues that the
police cannot reduce or prevent crime this way they need to be more problem-oriented
and less incident oriented particularly in community consultation and problem
identification. Such consultation will allow a redefining of the police role and function. It
is not sufficient merely to pursue order maintenance or crime control; rather, police and
community must define what local problems exist and the appropriate response.
Consultation can occur through a multi-agency group, a community group, or through
local teams of police officers providing contact and reassurance.
It may be argued however, if consultation is the seeking of consent, how effective is
that process and with whom do the police consult? Further, are all consultations true two
way pursuits of consensus, or are they mere instances of contact such as school visit or
Neighborhood Watch talk? One weakness in consultation programs is the limited
opportunities they provide to discuss a response to problems as they arise. This is
particularly noticeable in Zambia, where formal meetings are held, in most cases there
are no such meetings for a long time. Another weakness is the tendency to represent a
very large section of the area’s population. Specific problems affecting local community
would likely to be known and raised at large group meetings.
One cannot easily gauge whether representation by such a large group is effective, but
one can deduce from the infrequency of meetings that they are not suitable vehicle for
attempting to meet community expectations and needs. Formal community consultation,
in Zambia then, has great weaknesses in addition to its underrepresentation of the young
males and females, marginalized poor people, motorists and offenders, whose
unwillingness to attend such a formal forum compromises any hope that this style of
consultation could achieve the goal of quality service in the Zambia police service. As a
result, police will continue to choose their own policing style, subject to government
pressures, and little effort will be made to address the causes behind lack of consultation.
Further, another effort in community policing to improve police community relations
involves the reintroduction of the pre-world war II practice of “walking the beat” It has
been felt that patrol cars isolated officers from citizens and that if police had been put
back on the streets, people would get to know them and feel a greater sense of security.
Sherman (1987) argued that preventive foot patrol, which entails an increase in police
presence and visibility, deters criminals from committing crimes and thereby reduces
citizen’s fear and fosters good police community relations. However, foot patrols or
“walking the beat” can be critiqued on the basis that allocating more police to entire
neighborhoods does not always have a deterrent effect because not all areas of
neighborhood are highly risk for crime. The police presence, rather than being distributed
over the whole neighborhood, should be intensified in hot spots of crime, particular
places within neighborhood that are the source of the most calls to the police.
Another strategy for enhancing public perception of the police consists of police-
community relations programmes. According to Sweeny (1982,) these programmes do
not change the basic method of policing; but by reaching out into the community, they
have good results as there is:
• Increased likelihood of citizen’s cooperation in providing information to assist in
law enforcement.
• More voluntary compliance with the law
• Improved relations with majority groups
• Community support for budget appropriations in an environment of competing
demands.
Apart from the possible crime prevention and detection, if the programmes are properly
implemented, a key advantage of citizen involvement in crime prevention may lead to an
instilling in members of the public a sense of belonging and cohesion and feeling of
competence and efficacy. This may in turn lead to higher moral and ethical standards.
Civic engagement thus serves to improve both the government and the citizen. This
cooperation in crime prevention activities may ultimately lead to a reduction in crime and
the fear of crime, thus encouraging closer community relations among the residents and
also with the police. However, the critical part of this strategy is that for it to be
successful, it mainly relies on close and regular contacts within the community. But
considering the Zambian situation is it possible to maintain regular contacts between the
police and the public when the Zambia police is faced with inadequate manpower, lack of
police presence in certain areas especially shanty compounds due to lack of office
accommodation, and lack of transport. Another critique is based on the premise that the
majority areas are poor hence support for budget appropriations is impossible to be
achieved.

Since the introduction of Zambia Police Reforms in 1994, there has been no major
written literature on the impact of community policing in relation to Zambia. However,
there is some literature on the way Zambia police has been policing its citizens in an
effort to fight crime. The Zambia police Annual Reports of 1964 to 1972, have largely
identified the shortage of qualified manpower and efforts of the liberation struggles in
Neighboring countries and the emergency of armed robberies involving the use of fire
arms in the late 1960s and early 1970s especially in the Copper Belt Province, as having
influenced the police policing strategies in combating crime. These reports also indicate
that the Lumpa uprising and the Mushala Rebellion had a bearing on the policing system
adopted by the Zambia Police Service of using the paramilitary police at that time. The
emergency of armed robberies influenced the formation of flying Squad basing more on
militaristic approach of fighting crime through rapid response.
Authors such as (Hatchard and Ndulo, 1994) have also identified that lack of
manpower undoubtedly seriously affected, police effectiveness to fight crime. As the
Inspector General of police notes in his 1986 Annual Report: “There is an acute shortage
of both administrative and operational manpower. Crime which could easily be contained
has accelerated due to lack of beat and general patrols by the police. The little manpower
which is available is engaged in guarding vital installations, banks, and VIPs and only a
few are left to patrol and protect the general public” (P.I).
Further the introduction of one party constitution had a negative impact on the
administration and policing of the police force as well. For instance, the party supremacy
principle meaning that, all police officers were required to sit for Political Education
Examination and the Inspector General of Police was sitting on the United National
Independence Party (UNIP) Central Committee. In an effort to assist the police through
the Zambia Police Amendment Act of 1985, in 1986 the government introduced the use
of Vigilante Patrols. Vigilante required the approval of the party officials to operate.
These were formed into section consisting of at least five people, and having the task of
patrolling urban areas, tracking and if possible identifying criminals; and assisting the
police in detecting and apprehending any person suspected of committing an offence
(Hatchard and Ndulo, 1994).The literature further, stresses that the policing of crime was
also being affected by serious shortage of police stations in urban areas. For example,
while the population of Lusaka is ever increasing since 1964, no new major stations have
been built. Consequently, this placed an enormous strain on existing stations. Small
stations which were built and established to cater for small areas prior to independence,
catered for areas ten times large than they had been designed to cover (Ibid, 1994).
However, the critical analysis of this literature is that it is not very much related to
community policing strategies because it is concerned with general policing strategies
and their challenges that characterized the period between 1964 and 1994. Therefore, it
can be concluded that the work is very much related to professional model of policing or
the crime fighting model which was more militaristic approach than the partnership
approach currently obtaining in Zambia.
With the introduction of police reforms in 1994, literature on police reforms through
community policing has appeared in form of the Police Reforms Policy Document of
1994, Zambia Police Strategic Plans of 1995 to 2000 and 2001- 2006, and the Zambia
Police Research and Planning Unit Document on Policing Changes in the Zambia Police
of 1997. Other documents include the 1999 Police (Amendment) Act, the Police Annual
Reports from 1995 to 2006 and the Strategic Plan for the Ministry of Home Affairs of
2003 – 2007. Another literature relating to police reforms through community policing is
in the book by Ndhlovu (1995), entitled “Introducing Community Policing in Zambia”.
Nevertheless, these publications or documents have mainly concentrated on the
mission statement and the police objectives. While Ndhlovu’s book is more on the history
of the Zambia Police Force and how reforms were introduced and the adopting of
community policing strategy to prevent and fight crime in Zambia. As a result these
publications and documents never attempted to evaluate the impact of Community
Policing Strategy on crime in Zambia. Therefore, the literature is concentrating mainly on
the origins of policing in England, the evolution of policing in Zambia, as well as the
politicization of the police between 1972 and 1991, the introduction of the Zambia Police
Reforms in 1994 and the adoption of community policing as a strategy to prevent, fight
and reduce crime in Zambia.
Further literature related to community policing in Zambia, is the work done by F.X
Musonda (2002), in the book entitled the “History and Reformation of Zambia Police
Service”. While his work was done some good seven years after implementation of
community policing strategies in Zambia, however, his work has failed to explain why
community policing strategy has not faired well to reduce crime in Zambia. But instead
the book followed the same path like Ndhlovu’s book by concentrating on the historical
developments of the police force in Zambia which was characterized by militaristic type
of policing and politicization of the Zambia police by UNIP leadership. The literature
emphasized more on the policing of civil disturbances by the Mobile Police Unit, the
creation of Para-Military Police for the purpose of securing the borders and the creation
of the Flying Squad for controlling armed robberies.
Furthermore, the literature concentrated on the creation of the Vigilantes (the party
police) in order to bring the police in line with party policing programmes. The literature
ignored much needed information on the impact of community policing in Zambia and
duel much on the discussion of how Police Reforms were introduced and the adoption of
community policing. Further, it plainly discussed the leadership style of Inspector
General of Police who was at the helm of leadership during the reformation of the
Zambia police instead of critically evaluating the performance of community policing.
Though in little sense it acknowledges some failures, the literature evaluated the human
rights observance by the Zambia police in which the police have been criticized in the
way they handled the suspects of the coup attempt of 28th October 1997, as well as the
handling of the Public Order Act on the opposition political parties. The literature also
argued that under the leadership of Mr Francis Ndhlovu, there was growing public
discontent over police inertial and failure to contain the rising wave of crime, which
traumatized the citizens. However, this statement may be criticized because no evaluation
on crime has ever been carried out to ascertain the levels of crime then, it was just based
on the information from the print media which could not be scientifically proved.
Therefore, the literature in Musonda’s book fell short to bring out the actual information
on the impact of community policing in relation to crime reduction, relationship between
the public and the police and the change of public attitude towards the police. The
literature only concentrated on the negative part of the police and leaving out the positive
role community policing played under the leadership of Mr Francis Ndhlovu.
The literature “under-appreciated” the role community policing played under the reign
of Ndhlovu. Yet it was during his reign that the police underwent a number of positive
reforms that enhanced police effectiveness for example, the creation of most community
police posts which brought the police closer to the community and hence improved the
relationship between the police and community, the introduction of Community
Services Directorate which oversees the implementation of community policing
programmes like Victim Support Unit, Community Liaison Unit and other units.
Furthermore, it was under his reign between 1993 and 2000 that also included human
rights on the police curicurrum at all police training institutions.
Finally, some literature on police reforms in other countries like Multi-Choice
Policing in Africa with keen interest on “Who is Policing Uganda and Sierra Leone?” by
Bruce Baker (2008), Comparative International and Criminal Justice System Policing,
Judiciary and Corrections on “Policing and Public Disorder in the United Kingdom” by
Ebbe (1996), ‘The Future of Policing’, Law and Society Review, by Bayley, D. and
Shearing. (1996), and other literature is of some help in understanding the dynamic of
police reforms and community policing strategies in Zambia. The above reviewed
literature emphasizes that during the past three decades, police forces all over the world
have been restructuring their organization with a view to changing the internal culture of
organization, increasing operational performance, efficiency and cooperation with the
public. However, it may be argued that the restructuring process and preferred policing
strategies have been varying due to the fact that there is no agreed definition of what the
police are. This is a result of the given differences of origin-legal, culturally and
organizationally of police forces internationally. Also the reforms have been affected by
the different political, economic, legal, institutional and personality factors, and also
depending on the type of political regime.
Therefore, from the preceding literature it can then be concluded that since inception
in 1995, community policing in Zambia has scarcely been researched to explain its
impact on crime and other issues it was adopted for. The neglect on studies of community
policing is all the more unexpected, given the large output of studies on democracy,
human rights abuse and good governance in Zambia. Policing is surely crucial to how
citizen enjoy the freedoms of democracy and the protection of government, and how they
view their government. Therefore, the Zambia Police Service has been failing to identify
the gaps it needs to improve upon its policing strategies to prevent, fight and reduce
crime and how to provide a quality service to its citizen. This study sets out to redress this
neglect.
However, the lessons learnt from the reviewed literature is that since the introduction
of community policing which was in line with their mission statement and the changing
from “Police Force” to “Police Service” is that in Zambia today, the police appear
confused about their role. On the one hand, they seek to provide quality service, which
could be achieved through community contacts; on the other hand, they continue to place
emphasis not on consultation but on instant response being available to exert a coercive
force. Such constant response, often to repeat calls, does little to address causes-causes
which might be identified if the police were to depend on responsible low-level
consultation. The advantage by lowering the rank level of formal community consultation
helps to achieve three objectives. First, the formal group will represent a much smaller,
more clearly defined section of the population; second, the community will take part in
decision-making; and finally, a multi-agency approach will be adopted within the
community in order to consider both crime and its causes and give some level of public
ownership to the policing initiative. The current policing initiatives for police high
quality service as stated in the Zambia police mission statement will be unlikely to attain
the prime objective of community policing, that is, enhancing relationships between the
police and the community. It seems necessary to consider new community policing
initiatives for Zambia police which not only meets community expectations on crime
control and prevention and order maintenance but also meets the need for quality of life
and feeling of safety, neither of which exists now.
Zambia police needs to adapt to that philosophy of community policing which most
empowers the local officer, and which links that officer with the community through
effective consultation unlike what is obtaining now where the police service consistently
fail to consult effectively. The literature is largely critical of the police role, hence has
called for a strategy by which the police should cooperate at all levels with various
groups that represent the community in order to detect and deter crime. But this argument
is critical in the sense that a problem from one community cannot be generalized.
Therefore, policing must meet different needs in different communities and will require
different strategies of crime and order control.
Other lessons learnt from the reviewed literature is that low police visibility and lack
of regular contact with the community may cause citizens to feel that there is no one to
define and enforce social norms, and that the police neither knew nor cared about them.
The belief by the police that members of the public may not know what is best for them
has negatively impacted consultation between the police and the community. In
neglecting to respond to the very needs of those elements of the community, police may
appear to have lost the caring dimension in the quality of service as stated in the mission
statement and consequently undermine public confidence in the police. The conflict may
be addressed by changing the culture of the police service, to change behavior, police
officers must change attitudes by accepting service as their role rather than perceiving
service oriented quality as being imposed upon them.
Overall, the lessons learnt in the literature review is that given the limitations of the
state police in Zambia, meant that they have not been able to provide crime protection
and crime investigations for all citizens. As a result, it is inevitable that citizens will
mobilize to play a role in keeping law and order and in implementing ant-crime
strategies. Of course this strategy will always produce the emergence of undesirable
elements. Yet though increasing diversification is the reality on the ground, it is not a
clear cut diversification away from the state, it is still taking place within the boundaries
of state initiation, or at least state influence and approval. In practice, however,
community policing is primarily seen as a policy of enhancing the state police and
remains ‘police property’ that is, a police-led and state centered initiative against crime
and disorder.

1.7 METHODOLOGY

1.7.1 Study Area

The study was conducted in Lusaka urban district. The city was selected because it is
considered in Zambia to be a hub of brisk commercial, economical and industrial
activities which attract a lot of people, which as resulted to unemployment and poverty
leading to criminality.

1.7.2 Materials and Methods

The study involved qualitative and quantitative, retrospective and prospective study
methods of data collection. Qualitative method used semi-structured interviews.
Quantitative methodology relied on the use of questionnaires.

The study was carried in six different residential areas of Lusaka urban district that is
high densely populated communities of Chaisa and Chipata compounds; Middle densely
populated communities of Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga; and lastly low densely
populated areas of Kabulonga and Woodlands residential areas. The six areas have all
implemented Community Based Policing Strategy (CBPS).

The population for the proposed study was police officers from the rank of assistant
superintendant to the lowest rank of a constable in the selected police stations and police
posts, members of the public from three selected communities of Lusaka urban district.
Further all community service division officers at selected police stations and all assistant
victim support unit counselors in the selected police stations and posts. In addition a few
key informants based at Lusaka division, police headquarters and from other
stakeholders.

Two hundred and fifty (250) respondents constituted the sample. The sample consisted of
100 police officers, 130 members of the public in the selected communities of Lusaka
urban district. In addition, 20 key informants in the selected police station and posts,
police headquarters and Lusaka division plus a few from other stakeholders.

Systematic random sampling procedure was used to select 100 Police Officers in the
sample according to their strata of Superior Officers, Subordinate Officers and Other
Ranks from two (2) police stations that is Emmasdale and Woodlands police stations; and
from four (4) police posts that is Kabulonga, Nyumba Yanga, Chaisa and Chipata police
posts. The researcher used the main police station establishment to select police officers.
According to Emmasdale and Woodlands police stations their establishment was 182
officers and this also included officers operating from police post which are under them.
For instance, Chaisa and Chipata police posts are under Emmasdale police station while
Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police posts are under Woodlands Police station. 50
police officers were selected from each police station establishment and this included all
police officers operating at selected police posts because of the small number of officers
found at these police posts. Therefore, the police officers were selected as follows:

EMMASDALE POLICE STATION

(Includes Chaisa and Chipata police post)
Table 1.1: Number of police officers selected from Emmasdale police station and
selected police posts

Emmasdale Chaisa Chipata

Rank Police Police Post Police Post Total
Station
Assistant Superintendent 1 1
Chief Inspector 1 1
Inspectors 2 1 1 4
Sub Inspectors 6 2 2 10
Sergeants 9 2 3 14
Constables 9 5 6 20
Total 28 10 12 50

WOODLANDS POLICE STATION

(Includes Kabulonga and Nyumba Yanga police post)

Table 1.2: Number of police officers selected from police station and posts

Woodlands Kabulonga Nyumba

Rank Police Station Police Post Yanga Police Total
Post
Assistant Superintendent 1 1
Chief Inspectors 1 1 1 3
Inspectors 3 1 1 5
Sub Inspectors 5 2 2 8
Sergeant 7 2 3 12
Constables 11 4 6 21
Total 27 10 13 50

However, simple random sampling procedure was used to select 130 members of the
public in the sample. This procedure was chosen because it provides each element in the
population an equal chance to be selected in the sample. The sample selected from the
residential areas was as follows: Chipata, 25; Chaisa, 25; Emmasdale, 20; and Nyumba
Yanga, 20. While woodlands and kabulonga residential areas had also 20 respondents
each. The reason why we had more respondents from Chaisa and Chipata compounds
was because they are highly populated compared to the other 4 residential areas of
Emmasdale, Nyumba-Yanga, Kabulonga and Woodlands. For the purpose of easy
collection of data from our respondents we concentrated on houses that have streets both
in the compounds and other residential areas. Therefore, we picked one house out of six
(6) households to administer the questionnaire. Purposeful or judgmental sampling
procedure was used to select 20 key informants in the sample who have been directly
involved with community policing. In purposeful sampling procedure a sample is chosen
on the basis that it has typical characteristics of the population.

General Characteristics of the Sample

Table 1.3: Background characteristics of the sample [members of the public]

Characteristics Sex Total

130 Respondents
Male Female
Age
20-29 30 10 40 [31%]
30-39 18 13 31 [24%]
40-49 15 9 24 [18%]
50-59 23 3 26 [20%]
60-69 6 1 7 [5%]
70-79 1 1 2 [2%]
Marital Status
Single 52 23 75 [58%]
Married 41 14 55 [42%]
Type of Residential Area
High Densely Populated 35 15 50 [38%]
Middle Densely Populated 31 9 40 [31%]
Low Densely Populated 27 13 40 [31%]

Table 1.4: Number of Respondents from selected residential areas in Lusaka urban
district

Name of Residential Number of

Area Respondents
Chaisa Compound 25
Chipata Compound 25
Emmasdale 20
Kabulonga 20
Nyumba Yanga 20
Woodlands 20
Total 130
1.7.3 Types and Sources of Data

Data was both from primary and secondary sources. Primary sources was qualitative field
work that included in-depth interviews with officials within the Zambia Police Service,
Neighborhood Watch Association Members and interviews with both the police officers
and members of the public randomly selected from three different types of residential
areas in Lusaka urban district. While secondary data included statistical data mainly from
official records and reports from the police and other institutions as well as review of
various documents both personal and official.

1.7.4 Data Collection Methods

Qualitative and quantitative data was collected as follows:

The research used both qualitative methods to obtain data from various sources. As
Detels (1977) states, qualitative methods have the advantage of emphasizing social reality
as it is perceived and experienced by groups of interest. Quantitative data was collected
by using two semi- structured questionnaires to collect primary data from both police
officers and members of the community. A questionnaire for the members of the public
was prepared and administered. Another questionnaire was prepared for the selected
police officers from the rank of Assistant Superintendent, Subordinate officers (Chief
Inspectors and Inspectors) and other Ranks (Sergeants and Constables) found at the
selected police stations and police posts in Lusaka urban district. Where it was not
possible to conduct the interviews due to non- availability of respondents, the
questionnaire was left for completion and submission to the researcher at a later date.
Furthermore, semi-structured interviews or interview guides were used to collect data
from key informants in the community policing. While a desk survey of relevant
literature, organizational and personal documents was done to collect secondary data.

In cases where some respondents were unable to read written questionnaires in English
especially members of the public, the researcher had to translate in Nyanja or Bemba.

1.7.5 Duration of Data Collection

Duration of data collection was 5 months that is from 19th December 2009 to 22nd April
2010 covering the all selected residential areas and selected police stations and posts in
Lusaka urban district. The participation of the respondents in this study was gained
through informed consent and it was on voluntary basis and therefore, respondents had
the right to decline or withdraw from the study at any point. The participants were
informed of the purpose of the study before giving consent. Confidentiality was
maintained because anonymity was ensured.

1.7.6 Data Processing and Analysis

The qualitative data was analyzed manually while quantitative data was mainly analyzed
manually as well as using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). The SPSS was
chosen because it helps to obtain frequencies and percentages in an accurate, precise,
easy and fast way. In order to obtain the required information, numbers were assigned to
response categories to which individual belong. For instance, sex as a variable was
divided into categories: namely male and female. The number one (1) was assigned to
male and two (2) to female. The scores were expressed in tables consisting of frequencies
and percentages. In questions requiring a respondent to indicate the degree of agreement
or disagreement, responses for respondents were added up in order to determine the
percentage who had positive and those who had negative views for instance on
community policing effectiveness.

1.7.7 Problems Encountered During Research

It is obvious that the study of this nature was not able to escape from logistical and
empirical limitations. It was also impossible to cover all the police stations and police
posts in Lusaka Urban District because the population is big and the budget was
insufficient to cover the all area hence confining to the selected communities. Another
factor was time, since the approval for research came out somewhere in November 2009,
but the study had its own period to be concluded, hence to gather data from 250
respondents it was an enormous task to finish say within three months. To make matters
worse the data was collected during rain season. Another important limitation was that
since the study was dealing with the police service which is a state security agency, and
this made the collection of data with impunity resistance. Further to access crime
statistics it was another mountain to climb. It was only accessed through going through
crime registers at police stations and posts though underreported.
Further, the study also experienced problems in convincing members of the public to
fully accept to be interviewed and answer the questionnaire. This was so because people
still have negative perception on the police and many did not understand what was meant
by the concept of community policing and what has done to the community. The above
mentioned limitations though not the only ones as we can not mention them all, really
made the collection of data period from two (2) months to five months and three days.

The study paper is divided into five chapters. Following chapter one (1) which has
provided the introduction and background of the study, the conceptual framework,
literature review and the methodology of the study is Chapter two. Chapter two (2)
discusses the policing strategies put in place between 1964 and 1994 in Zambia as well as
the historical and development of organized police policing in Zambia. Chapter three
provides the analysis and discusses the findings on the nature of community policing
strategies in Zambia and it is divided in to the following three (3) sections: Section one
(1) discusses community policing in Zambia and an analysis on community based
policing programmes for improved policing is also provided in this section, Section two
(2) discusses the impact of community policing strategy. While the achievements of
community policing strategy are provided in section three. Challenges to community
based policing strategy programmes in Zambia are discussed in chapter four (4). Finally
chapter five (5) contains the conclusions and recommendations.
CHAPTER TWO: BACKGROUND AND EVOLUTION OF COMMUNITY
POLICING IN ZAMBIA

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The Republic of Zambia (RZ) as a geographic entity in the Southern Central of Africa is
well described in many classical books like those of Achola (1992), and WHO Zambia
(1998). Zambia is a land mass of 752 612 square kilometers (Chisanga, 2005). The RZ is
a land locked country, bordered by eight neighbors. The country is divided into nine
provinces for administrative purposes, which are further divided into 72 districts. Each
district is divided into constituencies and then into wards. Its population has more than
tripled from about 3 million at independence in 1964 to close to over 13 million by 2010
(CSO, 2010). The country is made up of 73 ethnic tribes but with 7 major local languages
while English is the official language.
Lusaka, the capital city of Zambia, is centrally located in the sense that it is connected
to other eight provincial centers. The population of Lusaka Urban is above two (2)
million as per 2010 census and is made up of low density residential area which is mostly
for people of high economic status, middle density residential area which is associated
with the middle class and finally the high density residential area where the people of low
economic status reside and it is mostly associated with shanty compounds.
Despite its occupation by Britain, the country changed from Northern Rhodesia at
independence in 1964 to Zambia, thereby preserving its historical link with the Mighty
Zambezi River. Like most African Countries, Zambia blends Western Cultural Values
derived from its British heritage with indigenous African norms. Zambia’s blends of
cultures and historical background have enormous significance and implications for the
present organization of its policing system on crime.
Right from its inception, the Zambian system of law enforcement has always been
patterned after the British model of policing formed in 1829 by Sir Robert Peel (Reid,
1994). However, it would be incorrect to suggest that policing in the country currently
functions at the same level of sophistication, expertise, and efficiency usually associated
with the British model. Lack of modernization is one of the main weaknesses of the
enforcement in Zambia. Hence conceptually it still much resembles its colonial
beginnings. Unlike the British model of policing, the Zambia Police is centralized, a true
national police service, and its management and control has always been the
responsibility of the central government.
In order to understand the much talked about community policing as a strategy by the
Zambia Police Service to fight crime, it was important to trace the Police historical
background and its policing strategies that were put in place to fight crime in Zambian
communities. The historical sequence coupled with the policing strategies of each period
as well as other considerations such as the motive behind the formation of the police at
the initial stage can be of help to the understanding of the Zambia police policing system
and community policing in paticular. The review of the three historical phases gave an
insight of what changes have taken place in the Zambia police as well as in its policing
strategies. This also helped to determine if these changes have played any significant role
in the fight against crime in Zambia.
2.2 DEVELOPMENT OF AN ORGANISED POLICE IN ZAMBIA

The development of the police in Zambia can be divided in to three main periods. These
periods are: - the first period from the colonial times to pre- independence thus from 1891
to 1963, the second period is the independence and post independence from 1964-1990
and the third period is the third republic era from 1991 to the present time.

2.2.1 The Colonial Policing Strategies: 1891-1963.

The origin of the Zambian experience of developing an organized police force can be
traced to the British tradition. The development of the Zambia Police dates as far back as
1891 when the British Government granted permission to the British South African
Company (BSAC) through the Royal Charter to extend its rule over the territory north of
the Zambezi River which is today Zambia. At that time the territory north of the Zambezi
was named in honor of John Cecil Rhodes, the founder of BSAC and was divided into
two sub territories namely North- Eastern Rhodesia which was administered by Robert
Codrington and the North-Western Rhodesia which was administered by King Lewanika
of the Lozi people. However, in 1911 these two territories were amalgamated to form
Northern Rhodesia. Therefore, from 1891 until 1924 when the BSAC handed over the
administrative responsibilities to the British Government this territory was administered
and policed by the Chartered British South African Company (Tordoff, 1980).
At first there were two Semi–Military Police Forces namely the Barotse Native Police
(BNP) which was mainly composed of Africans, mostly from Barotse land (now western
and north-western provinces of Zambia) and the North- Eastern Rhodesia Constabulary.
However, these were amalgamated into Northern Rhodesia Police in 1912 by
Proclamation No. 17 of 1912, dated 18th December (Jefferies, 1952). This continued to be
a mainly military force, but a small section of Europeans called the ‘Town and District
Police’ was recruited for the Civil Police work in the more settled areas. The division of
the force into a ‘Military Company’ and a ‘Town and District Police’ continued after the
administration of the territory was taken over by the British Crown in 1924. The 1924
Police Ordinances created the Civil Police with a mandate to prevent and detect crime
and to apprehend offenders. At its inception, the police force adopted the traditional
policing model of law enforcement and order maintenance hence it performed both
military and civil functions. In 1932 the two branches were definitely separated and
became respectively the ‘Northern Rhodesia Military Police’ and the ‘Northern Rhodesia
Police’ and its first Police Commissioner was a military officer Colonel Hardings. A year
later the Military Police became the ‘Northern Rhodesia Regiment (Jefferies, 1952).
Though the decision to separate the Military and the Civil Force had been a sound
one, the implications had not been satisfactorily on the civil side. A degree of shift from
military to civilian duties did not alter the European focus for their work. Further, no
steps had been taken to train the African rank and file as policemen (Ibid, 1952). Those
recruited from within the colony were chosen from those sections of the population
which were generally least educated, most distance from the centers of power and hence
least threatening to the colonial government. They also worked outside their home
territory lest be disinclined to enforce the law harshly (McCracken, 1986). The Police
force was paramilitary in nature and often recruited from the military. The intermingling
of functions meant the police performed both police and military duties.
The colonial police mandate was to secure and extend colonial rule and to maintain
order, in other words they were political in character; the prevention and detection of
crime came a poor second (Baker, 2008). Police work also involved in the surveillance of
European property ( including at times maintaining order among workers at private
factories) and persons, the persuasion of recalcitrant inhabitants’ to pay taxes, the
dispersal of anti-tax protesters, the recruitment of wage labor, and in the 1940’s and 50s
forceful break up of strike demonstrations (Ahire , 1991:68-69, 99). Police were perhaps
chiefly engaged in collection of Hut Tax, escorts of cash, accompanying the District
Commissioner on ulendo, and other duties that might well be performed by a messenger
staff. The social and economic control did not make the police popular with the local
population’ (McCracken, 1986: 131).
The colonial police force was small and urban centered and so for the most of the
territories it was local rulers through their agents (messengers and native authority police)
that enforced order and who were expected, as a condition of their tenure, to uphold
colonial rule. The rural interiors of the colonies were not policed directly by the
authorities, because of the size and difficulty of the terrain and more importantly, because
the area was not considered economically vital. The main areas of European investment,
such as cities, mines and transportation links were to be protected by newly recruited
armed forces and armed police (Baker, 2008). The actual position was that, it was only
the areas where there were European settlements that were policed. For instance, for
Northern Rhodesia, the police force was confined to the urban centers and mining
compounds. For the most part, therefore, policing was the responsibility of ‘the village
policeman of the native authorities and the district messengers of the administration.
Indirect rule ensured that the colonial state was the authorizer, but that in these specified
areas it looked to customary authorities to be the providers of security and order. It was
them who defined (or invented) and enforced customary law to regulate non-market
relations in land, family and community affairs (Tignore, 1971). Mamdani, (1996) aptly
calls this the delegation of rule and legal authority to local power holders, ‘decentralized
despotism’.
In Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia), law enforcement and order maintenance was
however, dictated by the events that were unfolding in the country during the late 1930s
and 1940s. Copper mines had just been opened at Nkana in Kitwe and Luanshya. African
miners were subjected to poor conditions of service which led to numerous strikes by
black workers. At the same time, nationalist movement demanding for black majority
rule grew in intensity. The Copperbelt region became their main area of activity because
of the influence of the miners on the colonial administration. Miner’s strikes which
mainly resulted into serious riots and disobedience were considered by colonial
administration as a “Communist inspired” threat against the very existence of colonial
government. Realizing the serious nature of the threat, and in order to ensure public
order, the colonial government responded by creating the Mobile Unit in 1949 based at
Bwana Mkubwa near Ndola to counter insurgent using the Police Force. This unit was
specialized in methods of combating riots and other anti-social behavior. However, in
1963 its headquarters was moved to Kanfinsa near Kitwe. The idea was to locate a strong
force for the regulation of civil order in the centre of Copperbelt province which became
notorious for its politically inspired upheavals (Musonda, 2002).
The rationale behind the creation of the Mobile Unit was that the civil police was no
longer an effective avenue capable of mercilessly putting down political violent
upheavals as well as violent strikes in the mines and other violent protests. The Unit’s
record of violently putting down any public disturbance was witnessed in various
operations all over the country. An example of such an operation where Mobile Unit was
involved includes the violently dispersing of the Tonga people in the Gwembe Valley in
Southern Province in 1958. The villages were protesting against the government decision
to evict them from their ancestral land in order to give way to the construction of the
Kariba Dam. The police opened fire into the protesting crowd and short dead eight (8)
people. The years leading to self rule in 1964 saw the police being used to crush dissent
during the civil disobedience campaigns orchestrated by the opposition nationalist
parties, using maximum force. This led to the general dislike and mistrust of the police
among the native people (ibid, 2002).
Though the colonial states were authoritarian regimes, they were often weak in
structure, in size, and in coverage outside the towns. For example Jeffries gives total
force size in 1951 (with population in brackets) for Northern Rhodesia 1,970 (1,866,000)
(Jeffries, 1952, 224). They were also weak in legitimacy, having to depend on force or
else on native authorities, who themselves lacked legitimacy where they had been
artificially created. The territory was divided into four Police Divisions, with thirty-two
Police Stations and Posts, several of the Stations, as might be expected, being located in
the region of Mining Compounds. In fact, about half the European strength and a one-
third of the Africans were stationed in the Western Division, which included the Copper
belt towns. In the rural areas, which the force until it was to be expanded could not cover
adequately, the Village Policemen of the Native Authorities and the District Massagers of
the Administration acted as Police. However, the size and ability of the Native
Administration police varied considerably many of these forces were too small to be
effective in crime control (Jeffries, 1952:92, 98,100,109).

2.2.2 The Post Independence Policing Strategies in Zambia: 1964-1972.

In October 1964, Britain granted independence to Northern Rhodesia which acquired the
name of Zambia. The Northern Rhodesia Police Force also changed to Zambia Police
Force by the then Act of Parliament, Chapter 133 of the Laws of Zambia which is now
Chapter 107 of the Laws of Zambia. At Independence, the Zambian population stood at
3 million while police strength was 12000. Police infrastructure stopped at 36 Police
Stations, two Training Institutions, Eight Divisions and one combat Unit.
With the expectations that the police at independence would be reorganized and re-
oriented from regime policing to a force committed to serving the people, little changed.
True, decolonization had seen an expansion and the belated Africanisation and training of
police forces. Nevertheless there was no change in their role: they were there, as before,
primarily to secure the new regime, which meant they were used for repression rather
than protection of citizens (Goldsmith, 2003). Continuity also prevailed in the methods of
crime control and detection; urban focus; the political intelligence work; and some cases,
the ethnic recruiting pattern. In a short time, almost all the independent states abandoned
formal democracy for some form of authoritarian regime. Commonly the change began
with moves to one-party rule and, typically, one-man rule. Mistakenly, political leaders
imagined that firm personal rule could keep ethnically divided nations together and
secure their own legitimacy.
Surely Mazrui, is right when he observes of the African state that, ‘it is sometimes
excessively authoritarian in order to disguise the fact that it is inadequately authoritative’
(quoted by Chazan, 1988:120). Under the authoritarian regimes the police forces were
poorly financed and poorly trained and, says Hills, subject to ‘insecurity, political
interference and economic depression’ (2001:33). Meek’s account of the Sierra Leone
Police could be applied to many more including Zambia, that from the late 1960s to the
1990s the story was: a litany of oppressive policing, nepotism and corruption that
undermined public confidence in the police…skills were not sought after and officers
were illiterate. The police were not given uniforms, training or equipment (Meek,
2003:2).
In Zambia’s case for example, the new government did not reform the police and
provide structural changes to the Police Act to enable it adopt new policing strategies
suitable for the new democratic dispensation, but it became comfortable with the
establishment and structure of the police. Hence the new government decided to continue
with a centrally controlled police force which was highly militarized. Firstly, the police
were brought under a tighter control, and that is, they were made accountable to the
president rather than the law. Secondly, policing was militarized. The new government
did not, by and large, understand what civilian policing meant and so harnessed the police
alongside the army to fulfill the regime’s aim of repression and eliminating political
opposition for example, the period immediately after independence, there were violent
clashes between the opposition, African National Congress (ANC), and the ruling party,
United National Independence Party (UNIP). Further, the government even continued
building barrack like police camps. With such colonial structures, the police had a firmer
hand to control and police the citizens, however, this meant the police were separated
from their communities and encouraged to cultivate a ‘tough and intimidating’ attitude to
civilians.
Zambia also became a base for freedom fighters from the neighboring countries that
were fighting for self rule. As a result, the country became a target for constant attack by
the colonial regime especially from Ian Smith of Southern Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, and
Apartheid South Africa. As a result of this, the post independence saw the creation of an
important wing, the Para-Military Police Unit in 1966. Its main function was to patrol
along the borders and to act as the striking force especially against disorders of military
nature, and guarding vital government installations or infrastructure like bridges and
power stations (Musonda, 2002).
Ndhlovu (1995), further states that the late 1970s saw the introduction of a crime
fighting strategy code named “FLYING SQUAD”. This was a rapid response motivation
in which fast cars fitted with radio communication, heavily armed with firearms were
assigned to areas of high criminality to respond to emergency calls mainly those
involving break-in and aggravated robberies. The rationale behind this strategy was
especially a response to the new crime wave that had hit the mining towns on the copper
belt, threatening both human life and national economical development. However, in
most of their engagements with the suspected criminals especially robbers, the officers
shot dead rather than apprehended the suspects. Even with this strategy in place the crime
did not decrease.
The reasons given forward then for such firm control was that most of the country’s
neighbors for example, Angola, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa
which was close to Zambia but not a neighbor were not independent. Civil wars with
freedom fighters were going on which had even crossed over in to Zambia because it was
hosting several liberation movements from the region. Hence, their role, as opposed to
their formal functions, was determined by what the regime saw as the best way of
ensuring its survival. The firm control crime strategy coupled with low levels of
education and ill training did little to increase efficiency and effectiveness of the police
force.

2.2.3 The Policing Strategies in the Second Republic: 1972-1991.

The period between 1973 and 1991 saw policing crime in Zambia become thoroughly
politicized. For example in 1972 when Zambia became a one party state, the Zambia
police was politicized to an extent where party organs were formed in the police camps
and stations. The police officers enhanced their chances of earning promotion if they
were active card carrying members of the party. Further the Inspector General of Police,
who is the chief of police, was a Member of the Central Committee of UNIP, the supreme
law making body of the party. Furthermore, the second republic saw the introduction of
the Vigilante Policing Scheme by the government in 1986 and this was after the
amendment of the Zambia Police Act No. 23 of 1985. This strategy was operating as a
Community Crime Prevention Association (CCPA), though it was organized on party
lines. The members were supposed to come under the direction and control of the police;
however, this was not the case, because the party officials and cadres became the
controllers of the police officers in giving orders and making decisions.
This was mainly because the party was considered as supreme over all government
institutions including the police. During the same period of the second republic, the
police detained political opponents with opposing views under the directives from the
politicians. The politicization of the police affected the professional conduct of the
officers which resulted in complete alienation of the police from the members of the
public. The police record of human rights abuses, corruption and high crime levels in the
country became widespread as public confidence in the law enforcers embedded further
(Musonda, 2002).
Therefore, during this period of politicization of the police, indiscipline entered police
ranks, resulting in incompetence, inefficiency and lack of accountability. Police welfare
and conditions of service were also eroded to the lowest web. Furthermore, due to lack of
manpower, both the Mobile and Paramilitary Police Units were now utilized as reservoirs
of man power to assist the police general duties instead of doing their normal duties of
guarding government vital installations and patrolling along the borders. “Unlike the
general duties, their training was tilted towards the military with less emphasis upon
intellectual caliber” (Throup, 1992). For example in the 1970s, Zambia experienced a
civil war in the North Western Province known as the Mushala Rebellion. The
Paramilitary police were deployed along side the army to fight in the rebellion and they
performed very well as an army (Musonda, 2002). Therefore, the inclusion of the two
units to do general duties meant that the police became militarilised. As a result the police
became detached from the community as reactive policing became rife and an efficient
way of policing the community in the country. Primarily, the only contact public had with
the police was when they saw them driving or when there was something wrong like a
riot or making an arrest.
With the police distracted by the security affairs, concentrated in central urban areas,
understaffed, under-resourced and under-skilled, criminal activities prospered. Frustrated
by the difficulty of securing witnesses and convincing forensic evidence, police resorted
to confessions made under duress or even to handing out summary punishment. But the
problems went beyond training and resources. Those who held weapons and had
information on security provision (or lack of it) were in the unique position to exploit
their advantage during times when pay was low and irregular. Their corruption became as
endemic as their incompetence in the eyes of the most populations. Consequently, to safe
guard their nations’ very existence, state leaders resorted to coercive internal security.
Ironically they found that the colonial emergency provisions and paramilitary police
could serve their interests (Amnesty International, 1998).
Therefore, the context of policing in the independent Zambia was one of a
personalized and fragile political order, often accompanied by conflict, repression and
corruption. This meant the role of the state police depended more on how the government
defined national security and how fragile public order was, rather than on the formal
functions laid down in the constitution.

2.2.4 The Policing Strategies in a Multi- Party Era: 1991-1994.

At independence many anticipated a national state police force that would provide a
universal, effective and just protection, but after three (3) decades of independence it had
become apparent to the Zambian population that their government was not willing or able
to provide the service promised. The explanation was partly financial, although weak
states often chose to privilege ‘regime stability and narrow sectional interests over public
safety considerations’ or at times were simply guilty of ‘malevolent indifferent’
(Goldsmith, 2004:4,7). As regards offering protection for citizens, state police were
widely perceived as indifferent, inept, and inefficient and corrupt (chukwuma, 2001).
They were also concentrated in urban and high-income areas.
Ndhlovu (1995) acknowledges that with the re-introduction of democratic governance
in Zambia in 1991, there was a call upon the police force to change to police service and
to be non-partisan as well to act professionally. The Zambia Police Force was at cross
roads. The poor economic climate meant that the kwacha was scarce and human
resources could not be increased. The police strength decreased lamentably due to
retirements, resignations and deaths for instance, from the strength of 12000 in 1966 to
5,700 in 1994, but the work load continued sky rocketing, hence the police force was
over loaded. Therefore, the police force needed to develop an approach to policing that
address the underlying cause of crime. But the police could not do it alone, hence the
communities were needed to be involved in policing themselves. This move included a
concern with the participation of citizens in matters that affected their daily lives,
consultation with the citizens, establishing processes and structures of accountability, and
working towards greater service delivery.
 The Zambia Police Reforms were developed following the introduction of the multi-
party democracy in 1991. These reforms were instituted in May, 1994 and the main aim
of these reforms was to improve the quality of service delivery in terms of efficiency,
effectiveness, professionalism and police public image through the training of the human
resource to increase the manpower. Another important aim was to cast aside the police
force’s previous military and political outlooks and to transform the organization into a
public institution that was accountable to the laws and to the community it serves from a
“force” to a “service”. The reforms were community based in that they were aimed at
bringing the police closer to the public they served by creating partnerships with
communities. According to the paper entitled “Community Involvement in Policing
Strategies” presented to a workshop for security staff at the National Assembly of
Zambia in January, 2002, “the police sought for a policing model which focused on the
prevention of crime through community participation and which would make the police
more accountable and make them win back their legitimacy”. Hence community policing
was adopted in 1995, as a means of combating crime in Zambia through prevention
measures.
Therefore, the Background and Evolution of Community Policing in Zambia dates as
far back as 1994, when the Zambia Police Reforms were instituted. Following the
Zambia Police Reforms, in 1995, the Zambia Police came up with the Strategic
Development Plan (SDP) for the period 1995-2000. The aim of the strategic plan was to
spell out the way forward for the Zambia Police in order to suit with emerging political
and social economical changes. The purpose of the Police Reforms was to come up with
a community friendly and professional police, able to combat the high crime rate whilst
respecting individual human rights. This would subsequently bridge the gap between the
police and the community.
The Zambia Police Service is tasked to provide direction for responses from crime
prevention associations and other stake-holders in the provision of quality service and
increase of public involvement through community policing programmes and pro-active
methods of crime prevention. Through the Zambia Police Amendment Act No. 14 of
1999, the Zambia Police Act was amended to allow the police to network with the civil
society in all activities aimed at creating safer communities. For example, the government
established the Crime Prevention Associations in the form of neighborhood watch
schemes under the Zambia Police Act Cap 107 of the laws of Zambia, Amendment Act
No. 14 of 1999. It was created under PART IX Section 48. In this part any community
may establish in residential, commercial or industrial area a crime prevention and control
association to compliment the police in the maintenance of law and order. Further
membership in these associations shall be voluntary and open to any person who is
normally resident or operates in the area or community where an association is
established. Therefore, the police today collaborate with the community and other
organiastions to bring out programmes aimed at creating crime free communities.

In terms of article 113 of the Constitution of Zambia, every citizen has a duty, inter alia,
to:
• Contribute to the well being of the community where that citizen lives as well
as observe health controls;
• Foster national unity and live in harmony with others;
 • Promote democracy and the rule of law;
• Carry out with discipline and honesty, legal public functions;
• Vote in national and local government elections;
• Assist in the enforcement of the law at all times.

Therefore, according to Musonda, (2001), community policing in Zambia is implemented

through the five initiatiatives:

• Beat Patrol: Here an officer is assigned a small geographical area for conducting
patrols. The beat officer’s major function is to provide crime prevention and
security tips to members of the neighbourhood.

• Neighbourhood Watch Group Patrols: Citizens living in the same

neighbourhood are encouraged to volunteer part of their free time to patrol streets.

• Community Police Post: Citizens living in populated areas which are not near to
a police station are requested to work together with the police in the provision of
office and residential accommodation for the police. This is especially in the
shanty compounds and other residential areas where the police assign a number of
officers to work in those communities. The focus of police function in these
communities is crime prevention through community participation as police
officers are encouraged to solve contemporary community problems together with
community members. These police posts have full station functions including
organizing community crime prevention and to develop community contacts.

• Village Policing Scheme: In distant places such as villages and farms, the police
coordinate with the residents in conducting investigations. They also offer crime
prevention lecture to local communities while still recognizing already existing
channels of authority within the village structures.

• Citizens Crime Prevention Units (CCPUs): In this approach, citizens are

encouraged to meet in smaller communities to discuss how best to secure their
nieghbourhood against crime and other social vices.

• Sensitisation and Awareness Programmes: In collaboration with public and

private media institutions, the police do conduct sensitiasation programmes in
both the print and electronic media (radio, television and print media) aimed at
sensitizing the community on various issues of community safety and security. It
is therefore, the duty of community crime prevention officers to give crime
education to various communities in order to reduce the incidence of crime rates.

The above mentioned initiatives are however, being implemented by the Directorate of
Community Services Division (CSD) based at police headquarters and in all provincial
police headquarters. The task of CSD is to coordinate, implement and monitor all
community policing activities and programmes in the country so that the confidence that
was lost in the Zambian Police could be revived. Individual police officers were taken
from their routine line duties and appointed community police officers. A community
police officer was to make rounds, on foot, and “to function as a planner, problem solver,
community organizer, and information link between the community and the police.
Under the CSD, four units were established to carry out the various programmes that
promote community policing and these are:

Community Safety Unit (CSU): One of the core activities being

undertaken by the CSU include: the promotion of Community Crime
Prevention Programmes such as Neighborhood Watch Associations
(NWA). In other words it sits with the community to find better ways of
policing. It is also responsible for the publication of crime prevention
awareness materials such as brochures, pamphlets and posters, holds
sensitization programmes on crime, and facilitates capacity building for
police officers and members of NWAs.

School Liaisons Unit: In Zambia, another positive thing associated with
community policing was the creation of the Schools Liaison Unit. The
Schools Liaison Unit was created so as to respond to issues affecting
children in schools and other learning institutions. This unit is tasked to
disseminate information on crime activities in Schools. It targets school
children who they share with crime prevention strategies such as how to
identify potential criminals. The Schools Liaison Unit: therefore, is one of
the programmes under community policing whose mandate is to form
partnership between the Zambia Police Service on one hand and the
Schools (staff and pupils) on the other. Community policing programmes
in schools are tailored to ensure that both pupils and teachers work hand in
hand with the police in the fight and prevention of crime in learning
institutions. The functions of the School Liaison Unit are:

• To sensitize school children on different forms of crimes that affect

children. This came about after realizing that children are victims of crime
and at times are perpetrators of crime knowingly or unknowingly. The
unit’s role is to sensitize children concerning the crimes that affect them
viz. child abuse: sexual abuse (defilement, rape, indecent assault, etc),
physical abuse for instance, assault, substance abuse (drugs, alcohol) and
psychological abuse. Last but not the least also sensitization on vandalism.

• To offer children security education as this helps instill a sense of security

awareness in children at a tender age.

• The unit strives to make children law-abiding citizens so that they grow up
as responsible people who will contribute positively to the development of
the country.

• The unit also teaches children about their rights and what they should do if
they are violated by any one.
 • The unit also explains the juvenile justice system to children. The juvenile
justice system’s main focus is to prevent and safe guard the well-being of
children who come into conflict with the law. This could be at the police
station, courts of law or detention facilities.

In order to ensure that the above objectives are enforced, the unit is in the process of
establishing Crime Prevention Clubs in schools and other learning institutions. Crime
Prevention Clubs will ensure that crime sensitization and education are enforced in
schools and learning institutions. These clubs will also help equip children with
knowledge on how to work with the police on crime prevention programmes and how
they can react and protect themselves if they are in danger. Further, these clubs will also
help to ensure that they offer safety tips to school going children. Hence, the creation of
Crime Prevention Education through clubs helps to create a free environment in
institutions of learning. This is important because a crime prone school cannot effectively
provide the necessary knowledge to children as the school may not provide a conducive
atmosphere for learning. The schools liaison unit is, therefore committed to ensuring that
schools are free from all forms of violence and crime as this is a stepping stone for
building safer communities.

Chaplaincy Unit (CU): This unit is charged to give spiritual encouragement to

police officers and their families and also offers spiritual counseling to victims of
crime. However, this unit has been implemented only at national and divisional
level, hence it is not active at station level where it is needed most.

Victim Support Unit (VSU): The Zambia police service saw it fit to create a
separate unit called the Victim Support Unit (VSU) under the Community
Services Division. According to the police Act, there shall be a Victim Support
Unit at all police stations and posts to be administered by police officers
appointed by the Inspector General of Police. Therefore, the functions of a Victim
Support Unit are:
(i)To provide professional counseling to victims of crime and to offenders; and
(ii) To protect citizens from various forms of abuse

The Victim Support Unit in Zambia in most instances deal with victims of defilement,
rape, sexual assaults, gender based cases like domestic violence related cases and
property grabbing on the death of a spouse, negligence, child desertion, assault
accessioning bodily harm, unlawful wounding, murder, malicious damage to property,
incest, threatening violence and child abduction. The main aim of the VSU is, therefore,
to help people cope with the crime and abuse they have experienced. Another important
thing worth mentioning is that the police officers in the Victim Support Unit may co-
ordinate with the civil society and professional bodies in carrying out their duties.
In short, Victim Support Unit offers special treatment to victims of crime, especially
women and children who are the weaker members of society both financially and
physicallyt. However, of all the units, the VSU is the most successful in implementation
of community policing because it has received a lot of donor support in terms of finances,
transport and infrastructure. Besides the support mentioned earlier, the focus has been on
training through seminars and workshops, advice on strategic and operational planning,
and senior personnel, and through the United Nations Civil Police programmes.
It should be noted that the police establishment has made provision for Community
Services Division personnel at all police stations and some police posts. Even if most of
these police stations and police post officers may not be doing the actual work of
community services, the structures have been established in stations and police posts at
least. In police stations and police posts where officers are available and doing the work
of community services, the community has appreciated their contribution and there is
evidence to prove that the relationship between the police and the community has
improved in such areas. The case of Nyumba Yanga in Woodlands area where the
community has assisted to arrange for funding for renting a police post and houses for
police officers is a good example of how good community relations can lead to
development.
This move included a concern with the participation of citizens in matters that affect
their daily lives, consultation with citizens, establishing processes and structures of
accountability, and working greater service delivery. The police as the most public face
of the state were to be seen to reflect the new democratic ethos. Therefore, this
represented a major change from police forces that were historically brutal and
discreditable. While there were attempts on the part of governments to democratize, the
reality on the ground is that governments in Southern Africa have remained autocratic
and intolerant of popular mobilization and protest. The police in Zambia, Zimbabwe, and
Swaziland have all been employed in recent years to repress opposition collective action
(Amnesty International, 2002a). Further, despite attempts to transform (or more
appropriate to reform) police forces in these countries, police management as well as
police legislation has not changed.
Therefore, Police forces may try to practice the philosophy of community- oriented
policing, but this will be limited if police organizations themselves are not internally
democratic. Police management and governments in most Southern African countries
including Zambia have failed to see the link between internal and external
democratization in police agencies (Marks, 1998).

2.2.5 CONCLUSION

The chapter has fully discussed the background and development of organized police in
Zambia by tracing its colonial antecedents. It has also discussed the post-colonial
Zambia, and has shown that like any other African countries, Zambia inherited a police
force that was influenced by the bifurcated state. The chapter finally discussed the
evolution of community policing in Zambia.
In conclusion the study in this chapter, discussed what characterized the whole period
of the colonial rule policing, where policing changed from militarization through de-
militarization to re-militarization, over a short period of time. Thus colonial policing in
Africa never followed the idealized European model of a civilian force, living in the
community, under local control and engaged in upholding the rule of law. It was not
locally authorized and controlled policing that was impartial and politically neutral. It
was centrally controlled regime policing; and regime policing necessitates a very distinct
relationship between those policing and those policed, one that some believe has endured
to the present. Hence, the role of the police then was regime policing, policing the
colonial economy and upholding the authority of colonial rule.
Further, in the context of policing in the independent Zambia, was one of a
personalized and fragile political order, often accompanied by conflict, repression,
politicized and corruption. This meant the role of the state police depended more on how
the government defined national security and how fragile public order was, rather than on
the formal functions laid down in the constitution
It can then be said that much of the past policing strategy in the Zambia police, that is
from colonial period up to the second republic and few years into the third republic was
reactive, Para-military, and political and regime inclined. It was only in 1995, when
Zambia police policing strategies changed and adopted the one that emphasized on
proactive policing, particularly in the form of community policing. This strategy aims at
forging a partnership between the community and their police. The effort is based on
determining community needs and finding ways to meet those needs before they become
crime problems. It also became clear, that police forces which are respected and trusted
in their communities do much better in crime detection because they have the help of the
community hence the adoption of community policing by the Zambia police in 1995.
Therefore, in the next chapter we shall explain how community policing has been
understood in Zambia and how the members of the various communities have been
involvement in supplementing the police in the fight and prevention of crime in their
communities. Further, what programmes in the form of community policing have been
put in place in order to encourage community participation in the fight against crime in
Zambia.
CHAPTER THREE: NATURE AND STRATEGIES OF COMMUNITY
POLICING IN ZAMBIA

3.1 INTRODUCTION

In Zambia community policing was advocated when it became clear that the police were
becoming isolated from the community. Low police visibility and lack of regular contact
with the community had caused citizens to feel that there was no one to define and
enforce social norms, and that the police neither knew nor cared about them. Therefore,
the successful performance of the law enforcement, order maintenance, and community
service functions requires that the police have the trust and cooperation of the public. The
manner in which the police perform these three major functions, especially order
maintenance and community service determines the community’s respect for trust in its
police. Hence if such respect exists, citizens are much more likely to assist the police in
their law enforcement function. Yet good police-community relations had all but
vanished during the era of first, second and the first few years of the third republic, thus
from 1964 to 1994.
In view of the aforementioned, in the early 1990s, due to domestic and external
pressures on many African governments to democratize their political space, democratic
systems were introduced, which embarked upon ambitious political, institutional and
economic reforms. Emphasis was placed on good governance that consists of a public
service that is efficient, a judicial system that is reliable, and the administration that is
accountable to the public. Therefore, to correspond with democratic principles the police
forces as well seek restructuring their organization with a view of changing the internal
culture, increasing operational performance, efficiency, accountability and cooperation
with the public (Bayley, 1994).
As a result in 1995, the only solution for the Zambia Police was to adopt the most
widely accepted strategy for improving police-community relations in the form of
community policing. Community policing generally consists of programs and policies
based on partnership between the police and the community they serve in order to
increase public safety and reduced crime. Community policing requires shared
ownership, decision making based on problem solving and accountability. The emphasis
is on working in collaboration with residents to determine community needs and the best
way to address them and involve citizens as “co-producers of public safety”. Among the
goals of community policing as earlier indicated are a reduction in fear of crime, the
development of closer ties with the community, the engagement of residents in joint
effort to prevent crime and maintain order, and increase in the level of public satisfaction
with police services. The idea behind this approach is that communities have different
needs and priorities that the police have to be aware of if efforts to prevent crime are to
be effective.
Therefore, this chapter and its two sections present a systematic inquiry into the nature
of community policing as regards to public and police officers’ awareness and knowledge
on community policing and citizen participation in crime prevention in their
communities. The first section of this chapter, following the introduction, discusses the
nature of community policing in Lusaka urban district. In this section, an inquiry and
findings will be discussed on how the police have faired in relation to sensitization and
awareness, community participation, training in community policing. The last part of this
section analyses community policing in relation to police conduct and accountability as
well as the institutions put in place to check police conduct and accountability. Finally,
section two of this chapter discusses the role of the community in crime prevention where
the study provides the analysis and findings on pro-active crime prevention activities put
in place by the Zambia police service through community policing strategy in Lusaka
urban.

3.2 THE NATURE OF COMMUNITY POLICING IN LUSAKA URBAN

DISTRICT

3.2.1 Sensitization and Awareness of Community Policing

Community policing in Zambia was adopted in 1995 under the leadership of Francis
Njobvu who was then Inspector General of Police (IG). Hence as the adopted crime
policing strategy by Zambia Police Service there was need for police officers to be
receptive to the community policing philosophy. Therefore, it is prudent for members of
the public to be reliably informed what community policing meant for them to be
encouraged to participate. It is the duty of the Zambia Police Service to educate the
members of the public what community policing means and the benefits of this strategy.
In Zambia, the situation leaves much to be desired in the sense that at the inception of CP
only a few police officers were involved and since then not much has been done to
sensitize the police on community policing strategies within the police organization. It
has therefore, proved to be very difficult for the members of the community to know
what it is and to understand the real meaning of community policing. This is because the
majorities of police officers just know the basics of community policing but are ignorant
of what is involved in community policing hence the failure to educate the members of
the community.

Table 3.1: Members of the Community and Police Officers Perspectives on Community
Policing

Responses From 130 Responses From 100

members community Police Officers
ISSUE Yes No Yes No
Knowledge on the existence of 71(53%) 59(47%) 100(100) Nil
Community Policing
Knowledge on the meaning of 48(37%) 82(63%) 100(100%) Nil
Community policing
Sensitisation of Community Policing to 41(32%) 89(68%) 36(36%) 64(64%)
the members of the public

For instance, in table 2.1, most, 71(53 percent) members of the public interviewed stated
that they were aware about the existence of community policing in Lusaka urban against
59 (47 percent) who indicated they were not aware. Further, the study findings indicated
that 82 (63 percent) members of the community did not know what it means against 48
(37 percent) who indicated that they knew what it means. On the contrary, however, all
police officers interviewed indicated that they were aware of the existence as well as
what community policing meant. The study also revealed that the key informants and the
majority members of active Neighborhood Watch Associations or Crime Prevention
Associations knew what community policing is and what role the community was to play.
Furthermore, the study revealed that in the Zambia Police Service most officers both
senior and junior police officers are against most of the components of community
policing strategies. For example, 77(77percent) officers do not think it is right to allow
civilians or community members to be dictating on how the police should operate.
However, it was discovered that 53(53percent) police officers were willing to allow
members of the community to be involved in prevention of crime and maintenance of
order through patrols in conjunction with the police, provide financial and material
support to their local police station or police posts.
Few respondents, especially those directly involved with community policing during
this study, agreed that ‘some few sensitization workshops for the community members
have been done in very few places’, by the community services division (CSD) of the
Zambia police by officers based at stations, district and divisional level. The study also
noted that the CSD has put in place some sensitization programmes for all members of
the community, but can not be implemented because of inadequate resources such as lack
of adequately trained manpower in community policing, transport, and finances.
However, the majority (64) 64 percent of police officers and (89) 68 percent of members
of the public confirmed that the police as the major provider of public safety and security
have not done much sensitization on the meaning and importance of community policing
to both civilians and police officers respectively.
The Zambian Constitution provides for the establishment of the Zambia Police Force
in Article 103, and among its functions as stated in Article 104, section (d): “to co-
operate with the civilian authority and other security organs established under this
constitution and with the population generally”. However, there are no specific directives
from the Zambian people through the constitution or any other peace of legislation as to
how they want the police to carry out their operations and what type of policing strategy
they should be using. This was identified as a major set back by the key informant
interviewed. The study revealed that though the police service in Zambia adopted
community policing as a strategy to police the country, this policy has no solid backing
because it is not supported by an Act of Parliament. Hence in Zambia it is difficult to
know how the communities are policed.
For instance, the study findings are very indicative that in Zambia, the central
government never played a major role in reforming the police department as it did in
other government departments through the Public Service Reform Program (PRSP). This
is evident from the fact that there is no major policy direction on CP. This means that the
type of policing in Zambia by the Zambia Police Service is dependant upon whoever is
the Inspector General (IG) at each time to decide on the policing strategy and the reforms
to be adopted. Therefore, the approach taken in Zambia is different from the reforms that
countries like Uganda, Sierra Leone and South Africa adopted which had national and
political commitment to police reforms through Acts of Parliament. For example, the
South African Constitution reveals the first formal reference to “community policing” as
the prescribed strategy for policing a democratic South Africa, found in the constitution
(Act No 200 of 1993). In section 221 (1) and (2), the Constitution directed that an Act of
Parliament was to provide for the establishment of Community-Police Forums in respect
of police stations and the functions clearly stated.

Community Participation/Partnership

This is seen as a cooperating effort to facilitate a process of problem solving by joining

forces with various stakeholders in a given community. Community policing entails a
close cooperation and accountability to the public. The police in Zambia would want to
cooperate with the public as long as it is beneficial to the police service but not to be
accountable to the public. In Zambia the benefits of the cooperation between the police
and the public are looked in terms of crime intelligence, providing manpower for patrols,
and providing material support such as transport, stationary, food for use at police
stations and police posts. Further, communities provide structures for office space and
accommodation for police officers. Even if police officers consider themselves to be
professionals who know better policing issues than any one else, they have discovered
that if they want to enlist public support and cooperation, they must be prepared to listen
to what the community has to say, even if it is unpleasant. Therefore, it is important that
the public is allowed to speak and to be informed about policing strategies, tactical
approaches, and even the behavior of individual officers.
For instance, 40 percent of the 20 key informants indicated that they have taken
complaints about poor performance of police posts to their mother stations and also about
the discipline of officers to officers in charge of police stations. In the same vain, the
entire officers in charge (OICs) the study interviewed confirmed receiving complaints
against officer’s improper conduct from the members of the public. It was also noted that
those officers who have been found wanting have been placed on disciplinary charge
while others have been transferred. The members of the community do not only complain
about the bad behavior of officers but also recommend officers who work professionally,
hard working and dedicated to police duties for promotions. Hence some officers have
been promoted by the high command through recommendations from members of the
public.
In fact, all OIC’s of police stations and police posts have the discretion in the way they
handle complaints, in many cases the officer or officers concerned are called upon to
verify the complaints and the complainant in most cases are not revealed for fear of
victimization. Sometimes these officers-in-charge take the complaints but without taking
any action to the officers concerned depending on the type of complaint brought forward.
These OIC’s indicated that some complaints are not worth and they are just there to
tarnish officers’ image hence sometimes they would just ignore the complaint because of
the great mistrust they have for members of the public.
On the participation of the community in crime prevention planning for their area, it
was observed that most officers in- charge (OIC’s) only involved the community in
minor situations especially foot patrols. All the OIC’s that the study interviewed in
selected police stations and posts in Lusaka urban confessed that they do not trust the
members of the community through the Neighbourhood Watch Associationds (NWAs);
hence they cannot involve them to the fullest because the information ends up in the
hands of criminals. As a result they would rather restrict the number of people they
discuss with so that if there is a leak of information, it would be easy to locate the source
of the leak. To them it would be unfair to expect the police to whole heartedly embrace
the idea of community policing by involving the public in police planning.

Table 3.2: Members of the Community and Police Officers Perspectives on Public
Involvement in Community Policing

Response From 130 Responses From

members community 100 Police Officers
ISSUE Yes No Yes No
Citizens involvement in prevention of 44(34%) 86(66%) 37(37%) 53(53%)
crime and maintenance of order
Police consulting members of the public 37(28%) 93(72%) 48(48%) 52(52%)
in the way they should be policed
Community allowed to determine the 14(11%) 116(89%) 23(23%) 77(77%)
crime strategy for policing their
community

Lack of public involvement by the police in security matters was overwhelmelly

supported by the majority in the study as indicated in table 3.2, 86 (66 percent) members
of the public the study interviewed who said they were not involved in community
policing, and this was also supported by 53 (53percent) police officers who said members
of the public were not involved. On consultation and how the public should be policed,
97 (75 percent) members of the community said they were not consulted while 52 (52
percent) police officers also said members of the community were not consulted. Further,
116 (89 percent) out of 130 members of the community and 77 (77 percent) out of 100
police officers indicated that members of the community were not allowed to determine
the policing strategy in their area. They believe that this type of planning must start with
community involvement in other matters at local administration level which are less
confidential, and thereafter spread to security. In fact, formal structures of how the
community involvement will function and areas of operation must first be established so
that both the police and the public know their roles and boundaries for a smoother
working relationship. This has been done in Uganda, Malawi and Sierra Leone and so far
is working well.
As alluded to earlier, the Zambia Police Service lacks the policy document that can act
as a guide in the way it must police its citizens. The nature of community policing in
Zambia makes it difficult to put in place accountability mechanisms. At first glance the
desire of the public to engage in policing reflects their desire to acquire greater control
over their circumstances. In Zambia like in any other country that adopted community
policing in fighting crime, the initial motive was to enhance the local accountability of
policing through a greater level of local control, but is fraught with difficulties. The study
revealed that in Zambia, in practice, local police arrangements often come about on ad
hoc basis, without the approval or leadership of the community. For instance, according
to the findings from the members of Chipata and NyumbaYanga neighbourhood watch
associations and even the host communities stated that in most cases they were unaware
of the nature and extent of community policing activities in their area. Despite the fact
that such policing is often imposed on residents and only gains respect and legitimacy
from them later, is partly due to their style of leadership. In Lusaka urban communities it
was observed that the local policing groups mainly attracted those who had prior interest
in security and who are assertive by nature. However, such groups mainly lack
transparent in decision-making and the leadership is always self imposed hence may not
be elected or removable.
In Lusaka urban district, it is very clear that citizens are not fully involved in policing
their communities because they are not consulted on security priorities and how to meet
them. 93 (72 percent) members of the public stated that the major reasons why they are
not consulted are because the police officers do not recognize and believe that the citizens
can provide valid inputs in the fight against crime. The police are not in a position to give
part of their responsibility to civilians and also do not trust the civilians entirely. As a
result of this the local communities have not been able to monitor and evaluate their local
police effectiveness in its services.

Training in Community Policing

Any framework for reshaping attitude of police officers must involve staff training and
development. Traditionally, police training programmes have had a skills-based focus,
but with recent changes in policing, police officers require an attitude –focused training.
This would lead to the need for a pragmatic approach to training and development so as
to develop the capacity of police officers for improved service delivery. The police
service, despite its limitations and constraints, still remains the only acceptable
instrument for the implementation of crime policy. It is, therefore, critical to the
realization of crime prevention and reduction of crime in the Zambian communities. The
police service must create an appropriate and conducive environment for the efficient and
effective performance of other stake-holders in the fight against crime to get involved.
The police service plays a central role in enabling the achievement of community
policing objectives. Police service should, therefore, continuously seek new and better
ways to build a service institution that has the capacity to champion and advance the
course of policing that would encourage the citizen’s participation.
The purpose of human resource capacity building efforts in the Zambia Police Service
would be to raise the level of performance of the police service to cope with the rising
and ever- changing demand of the communities on security matters. It would also
increase the number of police officers trained in community policing, change in
orientation of policing and raise the awareness among police officers for community
policing strategies. Other effort of training would include induction courses for newly
recruited police officers, and seminars, workshops and meetings involving both police
officers and stake-holders for the exchange of information and experiences of community
policing in relation to crime. Having looked at the importance of training in the police
service, it is therefore, imperative to see what is happening on the ground in terms of
training especially in community policing.

Table 3.3: Members of the Community and Police Officers Perspectives on Training in
 Community Policing

Category of Respondents Response From 130 members Responses From 100 Police
community Officers
ISSUE Yes No Yes No
Training offered to 7(19%) 30(81%) 13(13%) 87(87%)
neighbourhood watch
association

On training, the interview focused especially those spearheading community policing at

police stations and posts including the neighborhood watch personnel indicated that
training is not heard of. As indicated in table 3.3, out of 37 neighbourhood watch
members only 7 (19 percent) indicated they received some training in community
policing leaving out the majority 30 (81 percent) members who said they have never
received and heard of any training for neighbourhood watch members being organized
and offered by the police. For instance, one officer who is the CSD coordinator at one of
the selected police station indicated that she only received training or attended a
workshop in community policing at its inception in 1995 and from that time to date
nothing has come forth. However, she stressed that instead only the senior police officers
based at headquarters have been able to attend trainings, workshops and seminars at the
expense of junior officers who interact with the community regularly since they are on
the ground. After receiving the training on community policing these senior officers
never share the knowledge acquired, they just keep it to themselves. The claim by the
CSD coordinator was supported and echoed as well by the majority police officers
interviewed for example, only 13 (13 percent) indicated that the police offers some
training to neighbourhood watch associations while 87 (87 percent) indicated the police
does not offer any form of training to the neighbourhood watch associations.

Table 3.4: Members of the Community and Police Officers Responses on Meetings
Held Between Neighbourhood Watch Members and the Police

Category of Respondents Responses From 130 Responses From 100 Police

members community Officers
Issue Nil Once Twice Nil Once Twice

Meetings held between 12(32%) 19(51%) 6(16%) 61(61%) 27(27%) 12(12%)

police and neighbourhood
watch members

The study, however, observed that in communities where neighborhood watch

associations existed; the meetings have to be called by the NWA themselves and it is
very rare that meetings are called by police. For instance, the study in table 3.4, revealed
that out of 37 neighbourhood watch members, 12(32 percent) indicated they never meet,
19(51 percent) indicated they meet once per month and 6 (16 percent) indicated they
meet twice a month. On the contrary 61 (61 percent) police officers said they never meet,
27 (27 percent) said they meet once per month and 12 (12 percent) police officers said
they meet twice a month. However, most key informers that is police officers
spearheading community policing and NWAs members stated that since the relationship
between the police and community is still not very good, most residents and police
officers do not attend these meetings if they are called because they still do not cooperate
and trust one another. Among the topics that are supposed to be covered at such meetings
involve:
• The nature of community policing and crime prevention
• The training of neighbourhood watch personnel to respond promptly and
intelligently to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder and fear
of crime
• The differences between criminal and civil cases
• Sensitizing the community of their role in crime prevention,i,e. detection
and reporting of crime, conflict resolution through peaceful means
• The importance of preserving the evidence at the scene of crime
• The preservation of human rights
• Conducting community awareness and sensitization campaigns aimed a
educating the communities and translating important laws and procedures
• Strategies for personal security and identification of security concerns
• Formation of crime prevention associations (where they do not exist).

One of the committee members of the Chipata compound NWA indicated that:
“the sensitization programmes through training, meetings and workshops are all about
teaching the citizens on how to police themselves”.

In Zambia one would have expected that members of NWAs who also participate in
crime prevention through patrols in their communities have been trained in some police
training basics to be able to know how to react during an encounter in the field. Hence, as
a result of lack of training, NWA members have many times gone beyond their authority
because they don’t understand their role adequately. NWA members are not trained in the
criminal law to understand which cases constitutes crime and which ones are civil cases
where the police can not come in. However, the majority interviewed, both the public and
police officers, admitted that NWA members have been known to have arrested and
harassed people for the offences that are not criminal like adultery and debts.
It is also a positive fact that some police officers have been exposed to workshops and
seminars in community policing. This has been done in Kabwe at Crime Prevention
Foundation Institute of Zambia (CPFZ) and also through seminars and meetings
organized by the CSD all over the country at police stations, police posts and some
selected communities. Some officers had also opportunities travelling abroad to countries
like Canada, Sweden, and South Africa for educational tours of CP programmes.
Unfortunately, the number of officers exposed to such trainings was and has still
remained too small to cater for the entire police service and in most cases officers who
have travelled are always the same and are senior officers leaving the junior officers.
According to the Zambia police CSD establishment each police station and police post is
supposed to have at least four and two trained community services officers respectively.
However, in Lusaka urban it was discovered that the number of trained officers is below
the number required to cater the 13 police stations and over 150 police posts. Even the
few, who were trained, some have been transferred to other sections while others have
died or resigned. As a result most CSD officers manning police stations and police posts
are ill-qualified in community policing hence the failure to succeed.
Further, when asked if the police had any future plans in terms of training more police
officers as community services officers, one of the coordinators at Lusaka Division
indicated that programmes for training had already been drawn up but there are no funds
to commerce them. The coordinator also stated that this is the general picture you will
find for all in- service courses in the police service, they have not been held for some
time now due lack of resources. An examination of the list of training programmes at
Police Headquarters waiting for funding revealed that Community Policing related
courses do not even feature on the list. This means that even if some funds are available,
CP courses would not be held because they are not a priority as it is not considered very
important compared to investigations, prosecutions, traffic, police intelligence,
communication and administration courses. To make matters worse community policing
is not taught to police trainees at Lilayi Police Training College as it is not part of the
police training curricular.
However, it has been noted that, training alone, even if it was to be at a higher scale
than what is obtaining currently, it will not achieve the required principles of community
based policing. It must be linked to the changes in the environment police operate.
Training should be reflected in police standing orders in the day-to-day instruction
received from supervisors, including law reform (UN office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs, 11/12/06). But what reflects on training in the Zambia Police
Standing Orders is not commensurate with the environment in which police is operating
today. What is found in the Zambia Police Standing Orders is still associated with things
like parades, musketry, automatic and weapon training and a few station lectures. There
is also basic and post- basic training. Basic training means initial police training for
recruits and direct entry cadets while, post-basic training means specialized and in-
service training. It is also important to state that training at police academies is always
carried out in accordance with programmes approved by the Inspector General and in
accordance with the Zambia Police Training Manual which has no place for community
policing training.

3.2.2 The Police Conduct and Accountability

In May 1994, the Zambia Police Reform Programme was instituted and adopted the
community-based policing strategy in 1995. As earlier stated, the main aim was to
improve the quality, delivery, efficiency and effectiveness of public services. However, it
was not only that, but also to transform the organization into a public institution
accountable to the law and to the community it serves from a “force” to “service”
(Musonda, 2002). Accountability is the creating of mechanisms in which the police can
be made answerable for addressing the needs and concerns of the community they serve.
Policing is not just about supervising organizations, but tackling some of the
underlying social issues that cause conflict and precipitate the need for policing
alternatives to the state police. In the first place, legislation will not suffice until there is a
mechanism put in place for investigating and punishing complaints against state police
abuse. In Zambia, the government formed and put in place a complaint authority known
as the Police Public Complaint Authority (PPCA).
The police have the responsibility of protecting life and property, and are the
preservers of law and order. This makes the police a critical institution in
constitutionalism, upholding rule of law, and human rights protection. However, as shall
be seen in this section, that there is evidence that police conduct towards the public
seeking recourse to the rule of law is undesirable.
Since the inception of constitutional democracies in the free world, the debate has
continued on the degree of freedom the public service should enjoy from public control,
public participation and public scrutiny (Vocino and Rabin 1981). Hanekom and
Thornhill (1983:184) identify public accountability as one of the prominent
characteristics of twentieth century public administration and point out that the public and
elected representatives need assurance “… that public services are under control and
carried out within the framework of the policies laid down by parliament”. However,
what is the meaning of accountability? If in any sense it can be said that government is
for the people, “… then those who hold public offices and possess and exercise power for
instance the police officers must submit their actions to public scrutiny and approval.
(Sallis, 1982: 18).
Each police officer as a public servant must perform his or her daily task with the
greatest care and responsibility as he may be called to account publicly for any careless
error, deliberate offence or culpable action. All police officers like other public officers
such as administrators and civil servants have to accept public accountability for their
deeds and misdemeanors. However, it should be noted that the issue of accountability
only applies when the public or communities are fully involved in policing their areas by
the police. Hence, accountability raises a series of questions: Does the police service have
standards of conduct that it adheres to; are there records that can be examined; to whom
are the police answerable for such adherence; are the members of the community familiar
with those standards that they can call for compliance? Is there community consultation
to determine policing goals and objectives? And beyond the local community, are the
police accountable for actions (such as the use of force) that impinge directly on public
interest objectives such as human rights and rights of privacy.
Police accountability is a contentious issue as it is a requirement of Community
Policing that police officers must be accountable to the members of public. The rationale
behind this accountability, like we have already discussed, is that the public are the
master and so they should decide what the police are going to do and how they will do it
and thereafter the police must account for what they have done to the citizens of the
community. To the contrary, the study reveals that in Zambia it does not work like that.
Many people interviewed, especially the key respondents and senior police officers
indicated that the police are only accountable to the ruling class and to a lesser extent, to
the National Assembly through the Governance and Security Parliamentary Committee.
The public have no avenues of holding the police accountable even if a gross misconduct
has been committed by the police. From the interviews by the senior police officers, this
is one area that the current police establishment has no intention of ever implementing
because there is no compelling government policy.
As we have seen from the foregoing, there are no established procedures in which to
handle issues raised by the members of the community. No avenues were created in the
legislation to have formal forums where the community would hold the police
accountable. The study has revealed that the cooperation that exists now between the
police and the members of the public has not led to the police being more accountable to
the public in the way they are policed. In fact, it has been observed that the legislation in
Zambia, holds the community accountable to the police in the way it operates
Community Crime Prevention Units (CCPU) through Section 48(5) of the Police
Amendment Act No. 14 of 1999 which says “Every association shall perform its
functions subject to the direction and control of the officer-in-charge”.

However, despite the fact that in Zambia, the police service is less accountable to the
public especially to the local communities, the study revealed that there are other various
institutions that exist to check police conduct, accountability and human rights abuses in
the police service and these are:

(a) The Police Public Complaints Authority (PPCA)

In 1999, the Zambia Police Act was amended to strengthen police conduct towards the
public or individuals, as the existing provisions did not spell out adequate redress or
complaint processes for individuals that are victims of police misconduct. Hence the
government established the Police Public Complaints Authority (PPCA) under the
Zambia Police Act (Cap 107) Amendment No.14 of 24th December 1999. The PPCA was
created under (PART XA Section 57A). The Minister of Home Affairs in the year 2002
as by law established and constituted the PPCA and appointed members of the Authority
as stipulated under Section 57B and 57D of the Act No. 14 of 1999 and came into force
in 2003. The Police Public Complaints Authority Mission Statement is to secure
individual fundamental human rights and freedoms from police abuse through
sensitization of partners, general public and other stake holders, receiving of complaints
against police human rights abuses; investigating abuses, making directives and
recommendations to relevant bodies. The functions of the Police Public Complaint
Authority are:-
(a) to receive all complaints against police action
(b) to investigate all complaints against police action which result in serious injury or
death of a person injured or death of person
(c) submit its findings, recommendations and directions to
• The Director of Public Prosecutions for consideration of possible criminal
prosecution
• The Inspector General of Police for disciplinary action or other administrative
action or
• The Anti-Corruption Commission or any other relevant body of authority

The PPCA is presently the institution to which complaints against police actions and
those, which result in serious injury or death of person, can be lodged. Members of the
public can also complain against the abuses, corruption and illegal detentions by the
police officers. The Authority is there to deal with serious complaints against the police.
These include cases of serious injury for instance, fracture, damage to internal organ,
impairment of body function, a deep cut or laceration or unlawful carnal knowledge.
 In addition, management units have also been established at the directorate level,
while discipline has improved following the establishment of the Legal and Professional
Standards Directorate which houses the Police Professional Standards Unit which was
established in 2003. The unit deals with complaints against police as received by the
office of the Inspector General of Police to ensure that police officers acted and
conducted themselves professionally. The Unit as well investigates cases of corruption,
arbitrary arrests and detention and other unprofessional behavior within the police
service. The professional standard unit has power to recommend action against a police
officer(s) found guilty of police, misconduct. However, this unit is just found at
headquarters as it is believed all Police Commanders at (division, district, and station,
down to the officer in charge police post level) are, essentially Professional Standards
Officers.
More serious than the corruption that still exists are the cases, though relatively few,
of police beatings and raping persons in custody especially in police posts where officers
take advantage of some sought of decentralized powers given to them as shown in the
tables below.

Observations of Police Conduct in 2003, 2007 and 2008

Table 3.5: The classification of complaints received and dealt by the PPCA against
Police officers in 2003
Nature of Complaint No. of complaints Complaints Complaints
received Pending Closed
Unlawful Detention 83 76 7

Brutality/Torture 56 45 11

Debt Collection 8 7 1

Police Inaction 45 35 10

Unprofessional 138 101 37

Conduct
Abuse of Authority 32 19 13

Death in Police Custody 7 4 3

TOTALS 369 287 82

Source: Police Public Complaint Authority

Observations of police conduct in 2003 within the Police Public Complaint Authority
(PPCA) framework shows that there were 369 complaints of police misconduct received
in the period January to December .These also varied from unlawful detention, police
brutality and torture, police inaction , unprofessional conduct, abuse of authority and
death in police custody. It came to our attention in table 3.5 that 82 complaints were
concluded and 8 (eight) Police officers were dismissed from the Zambia Police Service as
a result of detaining members of the public unlawfully. Further 6 (six) officers were
disciplined by the Inspector General of Police while 7 (seven) police officers were
cleared of allegations against them. However, the 8 (eight) police officers who were
dismissed fought for judicial review in the High Court of Zambia and judgment was
passed in their favor.

Table 3.6: The classification of complaints received and dealt by the PPCA against
Police Officers in 2007
Nature of Complaint Number of Referred to Complaints Complaints
complaints other Pending Closed
received Organizations
Unlawful Wounding 79 77 2
Brutality/Torture 33 1 31 1
Debt Collection 12 12
Police Inaction 34 33 1
Unprofessional 75 2 70 3
Conduct
Death in Police 15 2 13 1
Custody
Abuse of Authority 2 1 2
TOTALS 250 4 238 8
Source: Police Public Complaint Authority

Observations of police conduct as indicated in table 3.6, in 2007 within the Police Public
Complaint Authority (PPCA) framework shows that there were 250 complaints of police
misconduct received as compared to 369 in 2003. The complaints varied from unlawful
detention, police brutality and torture, police inaction, unprofessional conduct, abuse of
authority and death in police custody. However, only 8 (eight) complaints were
concluded and recommendations were made to the Inspector General of Police for
various disciplinary actions.

Table 3.7: The classification of complaints received and dealt by the PPCA against
Police Officers in 2008.

No. of Complaints Complaints

Nature of No. of complaints pending closed
Complaint complaints referred to
received other
organizations
Unlawful 80 5 70 5
Detention
Brutality/Tortu 44 2 40 2
re
Police Inaction 28 27 1
Unprofessional 36 36
 Conduct
Abuse of 20 19 1
Authority
Death in 3 2 1
Police Custody
TOTAL 211 9 193 9
Source: Police Public Complaint Authority

Observations of police conduct in 2008 within the Police Public Complaint Authority
(PPCA) framework shows that there were 211 complaints of police misconduct received
in the period 2008 as compared to 250 in 2007. These also varied from unlawful
detention, police brutality and torture, police inaction, unprofessional conduct, abuse of
authority and death in police custody. Further police unprofessional conduct was
exhibited when police shot and injured two University of Zambia students in Lusaka. The
students were demonstrating against their low government sponsored allowances. Police
used live bullets to disperse the students.
The study revealed that the marginal reductions in the complaints against police
officers’ conduct today is due to several reasons advanced by the PPCA and key
informants which include: Ignorance by the members of the public on the existence and
importance of PPCA as a result of lack of sensitization. Another reason put forward was
that complaints usually take long to be completed hence many people have been
frustrated and lost interest to report police bad conduct to PPCA. Further, a third reason
was that in most cases, despite the police officers being found guilty by the PPCA, their
recommendations mostly have not been enforced by the Inspector General of Police. This
discourages members of the public to report police abuses because whether they report or
not report no action will be taken against the erring police officers. This was supported by
members of PPCA who stated that they had no mandate to discipline erring officers
because the Authority only submits its findings and recommendations to the Director of
Public Prosecutions, Inspector General of Police and the Anti-Corruption Commission.
Noteworthy, is that the Authority’s recommendations do not necessitate enforceability or
compliance. These institutions are not under obligation to comply with recommendations
made by PPCA such that most often it does not receive co-operation especially from the
police in dealing with inquiries.
Furthermore, PPCA members indicated that the contributing factor in concluding only
a small fraction of complaints in the year 2003, 2007 and 2008 was because of inadequate
support both administrative and technical staff to do the day to day operations of the
Authority efficiently and effectively. The PPCA also lacks operational guidelines, for
instance there is lack of harmonization in terms of operations among the PPCA, Zambia
Police Service and Police and Prisons Commission. Finally it lacks resources such as
transport, offices and finances.
On the contrary, to PPCA, within the police circles it was argued that the reduction in
complaints against police officers is a result of police officers adhering to the concept of
Human Rights Observance due to sensitization programmes through community policing,
police station and posts lectures. Further, Human Right has been included in the police
curicurrum as a subject for trainees at Police Training Schools and Lilayi Police Training
College.
(b) Legislative institutions

During question time in the house: During sessions, provision is made in accordance with
the Rules of Order, for an opportunity for questions each week. These questions may be
answered verbally or in writing. Sometimes the questions are concerned with specific
administrative actions which must be answered convincingly by the Minister of Home
Affairs. Police officers should carry their work with great sense of responsibility, as any
misconduct may easily be questioned in the House.

During debates of public concern: When parliament carries a motion to call for a special
debate of public concern on a specific matter on the police, that matter will be discussed
in great detail. Therefore, police officers should keep their conduct above suspicion and
in the event that anything happens to damage the interests of the public, the matter would
be significantly.

(c) Courts of justice

Court cases are usually associated with the unpleasantness of the administration of
justice, but when public interest is at stake, courts of justice must play a role. Public
accountability on the police is enforced by courts of justice in the following indirect
ways:

During criminal cases against police officers: Police officers are not above the
law and the application of justice. Even them must pay for misdemeanors and felonies
they commit. The fact that police officers may be charged with any criminal offence
compels them to act responsibly.

During judicial inquiries: After any catastrophe which involves the police as an
institution, the government would instruct that a commission of inquiry be appointed to
investigate the circumstances, for example, what led to the shooting and killings during
civil unrest and riots. These inquiries usually determine the extent of police
accountability to the public.

There are widespread violations of human rights in Zambia. For instance in this
democratic era at least two commissions of inquiry appointed by the President have
confirmed the existence of torture by the police. However, the government has largely
ignored the recommendations of the commissions. Some of the torturers have been
promoted to top positions, showing clearly lack of political will to combat police
brutality. Hence, failure by the government to deal with alleged torturers has created
impunity among some police officers, extra judicial killings of suspects still occur
frequently.

(d) The public media

Since the government of the day believes in freedom of the press, except where this
might harm the country or its people, public media are constantly on the lookout for the
irregularities in the police service and subsequently make these known to the public. The
media focus on sensational reporting, and anything that would arouse public interest, will
be published in an efficient manner. Police officers must, therefore, act cautiously so as
not to catch the watchful eye of the public media, resulting in exposure by alert
journalists. Ways, in which the police conduct can be scrutinized in the media, include
the following:
(a) by inquiries and reports from investigative journalists
(b) through letters to the press
(c) in editorial comments
(d) in television appearances, interviews on radio or panel discussion

Therefore, in Zambia, the formal accountability of police conduct in the police service is
more likely with state policing, although it is even more likely to be accountable upward
for instance, (to the Inspector General of Police, or Minister of Home Affairs and
Parliament) than accountability downward (to citizens or members of the community). In
Zambia, the keeping of detailed records by such bodies as the Police Public Complaint
Authority and the Police Professional and Standards Unit, and despite the legal backing,
this does not address the on going accountability by the citizens for police action.

3.3 THE ROLE OF THE COMMUNITY IN CRIME PREVENTION

In Zambia, community policing through crime prevention has been upheld in the Zambia
Police Mission Statement as well as in the Strategic Development Plan Reports (SDP) of
the Zambia Police Service 1995-2000 and 2001-2006. The report emphasizes the need to
facilitate and encourage initiatives aimed at prevention of crime. Further, some of the
reports reviewed for this study also endorse prevention as a viable means of addressing
the crime problem. For the promise of prevention to be fulfilled however, it is important
to find whether the rhetoric of prevention is being translated with action. Unless the type
and magnitude of crime prevention activities being currently conducted is known it
would be difficult to have a baseline from which to measure progress in the field.

Crime can be reduced if approached systematically. Crime Prevention involves

responding to a few priority problems using different types of approaches. These
approaches aim at addressing the causes of, and opportunities for, particular crime
problems. Crime is usually caused when three things happen:
 There is a willing or vulnerable victim (target)
 A wiling and able offender, and
 An environment or location which is conducive to committing an offence

Crime prevention is basically classified into two (2) methods and the first one is called
the re-active method which is the detection of an already committed crime. While the
other classification is the pro-active method which is mainly associated with the detection
of crime before it is committed. Crime prevention is also about ensuring that laws are
enforced and that fear of crime is reduced. Elias (1986), preferring to talk about crime
reduction rather than crime prevention states that ‘crime reduction seeks to help victims
by devising strategies to reduce crime and victimization, largely by increasing victim
participation. However, as noted in Zambia it is not always the case that crime prevention
or crime reduction strategies necessarily involve greater victim participation.
In Zambia, however, in the last fifteen years there has been an increasing tendency to
widen the responsibility for crime prevention to include the community. The police
suggest two reasons for this. First, there has been an increasing awareness of the fear of
crime and the belief that such fear is having a deleterious effect on community life.
Secondly, there has been an increasing awareness that many people are affected by crime
either as victims or friends of victims. As a result of these two factors, the community
crime prevention programmes have emerged. These programmes have focused their
attention on the role of the community in crime prevention. They encourage greater
participation and involvement of individuals in crime prevention; and secondly they rely
on greater cooperation and co-ordination between the police and the community.
Having looked at what is meant by crime prevention and seen how communities and
other stake-holders can be brought on board to prevent crime in partnership with the
police, it is now appropriate to discuss crime prevention initiatives that have been put in
place in Lusaka urban communities by the police, community and other stake-holders.

3.3.1 Neighbourhood Watch Associations/Schemes

The community-based crime prevention programmes promote active communication with

the public and the police must be visible in the community, accessible, caring, with the
goal of reducing fear and deterring crime (Goldstein, 1987). The center piece of
community based crime prevention is mainly associated with the Neighborhood Watch,
which encompasses organizing and training people to report criminal activity and having
police officers make security surveillance of premises. However, it has to be recognized
that community programmes vary with respect whether the “initiative come from the
police or the public; whether costs are borne by the participants, government, or
charitable organizations: the size of areas organized; the manner in which leaders are
selected; the amount of effort devoted to maintaining high levels of activity and
involvement; the kind of provision made for organizing neighborhood units into larger
associations; and the level of on going support from the police”(Skolnick and Bayley,
1988:7).
Apart from the possible crime prevention and detection, if properly implemented, a
key advantage of citizen involvement in crime prevention may lead to instilling in
members of the public a sense of belonging and cohesion and feeling of competence and
efficacy. This may in turn lead to higher moral and ethical standards. This cooperation in
crime prevention activities may ultimately lead to reduction in crime and the fear of
crime, thus encouraging closer community relations among the residents and also with
the police. On the other hand, citizen involvement in crime prevention is not without
disadvantages. There are possibilities that some citizens may want to use the police to
further their criminal activities especially in communities where the majorities are
unemployed and poor. Others have argued also that the power to deprive a citizen life or
liberty is very important power that must remain within the government and not with
private individual (ibid, 1988).
 Encouraging greater participation of individuals in the community in crime prevention
programmes is not a particularly new idea, however the more recent initiatives have
promoted a victimization perspective. This development relies on what Hope and Shaw
in Ellias(1986) call ‘the mobilization of informal community controls’ which are directed
‘in the defense of communities against a perceived predatory threat from outside’
(ibid.,p.12). Taking a lead from similar developments in the United States and United
Kingdom, this defense has emerged in Zambia in the form of the neighborhood watch
scheme.
In Zambia the most well known and established avenue in which the communities
have participated in crime prevention is through the neighborhood watch association. The
neighborhood watch associations are aimed at reducing crime in the community. It
involves getting to know one’s neighbor and introducing the concept of neighborhood.
This means that the good neighbors work together with the police to alleviate the
potential of crime. They are chaired by the civilians and include representatives of the
significant groups and interest in the local community. The prime aim of neighbourhood
watch schemes is to give local communities a say on how they want to be policed. The
study revealed that police officers that were interviewed in the selected police stations
and posts as well as from key informants indicated that nearly in every community in
Lusaka at least one neighborhood watch association existed.
According to the coordinator of Community Safety Unit at Lusaka Division, stated
that the reason why the police high command emphasized on the creation of the
neighbourhood watch associations was because the neighborhood watch schemes are a
positive step against crime and constitute an opportunity for reduction of crime. This
stresses the importance of having ‘eyes on the street’ since there is some evidence
indicating that surveillance will deter criminals and thus reduce crime. Hence
neighborhood watch schemes are described as the ‘eyes and ears of the police’.
Neighbourhood watch associations also stress the importance of creating and harnessing
community cohesion. Therefore, community cohesion increases the interaction which
takes place between different members of the community in the common purpose of
crime prevention through the mechanism of neighborhood watch may lead to greater
civility and trust within the community and reduce the fear of crime.
Rising crime in the Lusaka urban especially in densely populated areas and which are
shanties in character has seen innumerable initiatives by communities to tackle it with a
degree of ruthlessness. In Zambia’s urban areas neighbourhood watches of 20-30 people
undertake regular armed patrols in the company of police officers. They have widespread
support because they are considered to be very effective in crime prevention. For
instance, the information provided by the CSD coordinator at Lusaka Police Division
Headquarters stated that at least in all the communities in Lusaka urban district there is a
NWA and went on to mention that for the whole Lusaka Division they have a total of 94
NWAs, though over 90 percent of these are not active. This means that most people are
aware of the existence of CP through NWAs as a crime strategy. This is despite the fact
that publicity and encouragement for communities to form NWAs has been very little. In
most communities, the association may not be registered due to the high fees that have to
be paid at the registrar of society’s offices, but it may still be operating though not
officially registered.
 There is an argument on the effectiveness of neighbourhood watch associations. This
is most obviously displayed when the questions of how and where such schemes seem to
be most readily implemented and the extent to which they are effective in achieving their
goals. The study provided an opportunity to explore the extent to which there was support
for this development. The study also provides an analysis on the findings. The study
suggests that: the strongest spontaneous support for neighborhood watch resides in those
communities where people are sufficiently worried about crime, where they feel the need
to do something about it, and where they feel positively towards their neighbors and to
the community in general and there is a police post in that community.
According to the study findings, neighborhood watch scheme seems to be popular in
areas where the worry about crime is high but the actual risk of residential crime is
relatively low. In other words it seems to build on an already existing network of
relationships which crime is most likely to be seen as an external threat to the
community. The study also revealed that the neighborhood watch schemes are common
in high and middle density populated areas of Lusaka like Chipata, Chaisa, Mandevu
compound and Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga areas respectively. On the other hand, in
areas where the crime is low, neighborhood watch associations are less popular for
instance; in low density areas of Lusaka like Woodlands and Kabulonga, these schemes
do not exist instead they mostly depend on private security firms as a mode of securing
their lives and property. In short the study revealed that the establishment of NWAs in
Lusaka urban is determined by the presence of the police.

Table 3.8: Members of the Community and Police Officers Responses on the
Neighborhood Watch Associations

Response From 130 Responses From

members community 100 Police Officers
ISSUE Yes No Yes No
Existence of Neighborhood watch 79(61%) 59(39%) 71(71%) 29(29%
Associations in their communities
Member of the neighborhood watch 37(28) 93(72%) N/A N/A
associations
Is the Neighborhood Watch in your 47(36%) 83(64%) 43(43%) 57(57%)
community active?

Earlier in this chapter, over 90 percent respondents who were interviewed indicated that
the citizens or members of the public are truly co-producers of public safety. On the
contrary, the study in table 3.8 revealed that 79 (61 percent) members of the community
were aware of the existence of neighborhood watch associations in their community,
while 51(39 percent) indicated that they were not aware of the existence of neighborhood
watch associations in their community. On the police side 71 (71 percent) police officers
as opposed to 29 (29 percent) indicated that in the area they operated at least there existed
the neighborhood watch association. Further, the study noted that out of 130 members of
the community whom the study interviewed, only 37 (28 percent) were members while
the 93(72percent) were not members of the neighborhood watch associations. Hence, it
could be deduced that only a few people are involved directly in policing their
communities through neighborhood watch associations as opposed to those who are not
involved.
However, according to the study findings it is clearly indicated that most of these
NWAs are not active. As shown in table 3.8, where 83 (64 percent) members of the
community indicated not active as compared to only 47 (36 percent) members of the
community said they were active. This was also supported by the police officers for
example, 62 (62 percent) indicated they were not active as compared to only 38 (38
percent) who said they were active.
Furthermore, the study also noted that the neighborhood watch schemes are less
popular in areas where crime is high and where it is believed by the people in the
community that the offenders are local people. They are probably neighbors. In other
words the problem here is that crime is seen as internal threat to the community. Hence
neighborhood watch is not necessarily the mechanism on which trust can be built or fear
reduced under these circumstances. Community members may see and hear what is going
on in their community but this does not necessarily lead to opportunity reduction, or
reduction in fear of crime. Therefore, people’s belief about crime does not facilitate
strategies which have these goals.

Roles and Functions of Neighbourhood Watch Associations (NWAs)

Neighborhood watch provides for a means of reducing the opportunity for crime to occur
through active participation of citizens in crime prevention programmes. Through NWAs
citizens are taught how to make their homes less inviting as the target for criminals, how
to participate in operational patrols, making the personal property less deceivable by
burglars and how to be alert to suspicious activities in their neighborhood. Very few
people are in the position to protect their homes and property all the time. For instance,
vacation, business and shopping trip or even on an evening outing and hence leave their
homes unattended to and become vulnerable to crime. The neighborhoods watch
programmes also provide a sense of security to individuals and families who leave their
homes for any length of time.
Further the neighborhood watch helps to coordinate the efforts of the police and the
community in tracking down criminals. Resident members of the neighborhood watch are
encouraged to be on the look out for suspicious behaviors or people. However it should
be noted that NWA should always be and remain in partnership between the police and
the community as it is stated in the Zambia Police Amendment Act No. 14 of 1999, that
every association shall perform its functions subject to the direction and control of the
officer-in-charge. In this sense the community are seen as the ‘eyes and ears’, but the
police retain their active role when dealing with actual or suspected crime. Therefore
below are some of the basic objectives of neighborhood watch scheme:-

• To supplement police efforts in order to combat crime by ensuring law and

order prevail in the neighborhood.
• To alert citizens and residents concerning crime in their area;
• To carry out sensitization and educational meetings with residents on how
best to protect themselves against criminal activities; and
 • To carry out any other objective that may be used in the maintenance of
law and order in their community.

Reasons for Joining Neighbourhood Watch Associations

When asked on the reason why they joined the NWA, most key informants especially
those involved in the recruitment of members and those who are members of
neighbourhood watch association in Nyumba Yanga and Chipata compound gave the
following as their reasons for joining: “to help the police and their community to
eliminate crime. One key informant indicated that prior to 1995, in most compounds and
communities of Lusaka there were many violations of people’s rights and this was the
opportunity to protect people’s rights. Another member of the neighbourhood watch
stated that by joining the NWA, it was also an opportunity to learn about the law and of
gaining legal advice.” Further, members added that before the formation of these crime
prevention associations in most shanty compounds of Lusaka there was fighting; now the
people are restrained because they know preventers are around hence it reduces crime. It
was also mentioned that these neighbourhood watch associations have assisted the police
on, publicity and educating other members of the public on the importance of reporting
on crimes like rape, defilement and other forms of abuse. Therefore, from the interviews
it may be concluded that the major reason why they have joined the NWAs is because
they see their primary function as assisting the police in crime prevention.
For instance, as a result of the presence of NWAs in most residential areas as stated by
most key informants, members of the public and the police officers interviewed during
the study noted that crime rates are not very high in areas where the NWA existed and
active. Both police officers and members of NWA interviewed in Chipata, Chaisa and
Mandevu compound and in Nyumba Yanga in Woodlands area stated that, where
cooperation in communities existed between the NWA and the police with frequent
patrols, crime rates especially of violent crimes like murder, robbery, house breaking and
motor vehicle theft have reduced significantly. The close cooperation has also assisted to
reduce the inadequacies of the police like the lack of transport, stationary and manpower.
On the reasons why the neighbourhood watch associations are not active, the majority
of respondents, that is police officers and members of the public, indicated lack of
support from the police as an organization such as equipment (raincoats, handcuffs, and
transport), trainings and financial assistance when the members are in problems. For the
response on the support given to the NWAs the majority, members of the public and
police, indicated manpower or human resource support.
Further it was also revealed that there is lack of support from the community itself
because most of the members of the public are not willing to be involved in security
matters hence only a few are willing to come on body to work and coordinate with the
police in combating crime through crime prevention. As a result of this many of them are
not active; they just depend on individual’s willingness or activeness to work with the
police as it is voluntary. This was also supported by most members of these unrecognised
NWAs in these communities. For instance as area stated only 37 out of 79 which
represent 47 per cent were members of the neighbourhood watch associations in their
communities. Another reason is that though most communities have formed NWAs, the
majority of them are not legally recognized or registered with the registrar of societies
because most of the communities are poor hence failing to raise the required fees for
registration.

3.3.2 Beat/Preventive Foot Patrols

As discussed earlier, serious questions have been raised about the effectiveness of the
traditional police strategies. These strategies are based on the assumption that visible
police presence on the streets will result into arrests of law breakers and ultimately reduce
and prevent crime. Therefore, for decades patrol work by police officers alone has either
been motorized or on foot with very little community interaction and participation.
Following the revelations of a research which revealed that randomized patrols and rapid
response may not effectively prevent crime and lead to more arrests, community policing
proponents contended that patrol operations should encourage a deeper community
involvement (Elias, 1986). Patrol officers should be encouraged to know the community
by talking to people and encouraging requests for non-emergency services and be a
remarkable part of the community scene. This is an effort to overcome the barriers to
communication that reactive randomized patrols usually present (Goldstein, 1987). In this
way, patrol officers would be able to respond to community concerns more positively and
ultimately explain police services more accurately and solicit information that leads to
arrests and prosecution. Police will still respond to emergencies but a large portion of
patrol personnel will be deployed to proactive crime prevention.
For example, it was agreed by the majority key informants in the study, that police and
NWA patrols assist significantly to prevent crime in the communities because they
increase police presence. Actually it was observed that in most police posts they mostly
depended on NWA members to do their patrols though most of them are not registered.
Further, information from the coordinator of community safety unit during the study at
police headquarters is that in the early stages on the introduction of community policing
in Zambia in 1995, the patrols in Lusaka were boosted when the Zambia police got a
grant of $30,000 US from the Public Sector Capacity-Building Project (PSCAP) to
acquire radio community equipment for use during patrols. This equipment was supposed
to assist the NWAs to be more efficient in the use of communication, transport and
manpower during patrols. Unfortunately, due to lack of training and knowledge on how
to use the equipment on the part of NWA members and the majority of NWAs not
operational due to non availability of registration fees. Therefore, this meant that the
equipment was transferred to the police stations and police posts and connected to police
channels.

3.3.3 Community Police Posts

Another proactive crime prevention measure in Zambia was the establishment of

community police posts. In Zambia, it has been observed that police officers operating in
these police posts patrol their areas in the company of members of the community from
neighborhood watch schemes. These patrols are either on foot or car mostly solicited
from the members of the community. However, foot patrols may not, of course, lessen
the volume of services requested, but they extend, deepen, and personalize interaction.
The officers in these police posts have autonomy in deciding how to implement policing
in their area. This creates the possibility of more intimate police-community relationship
and allows police officers the opportunity to gather more information in their area.
Currently, at least all communities in Lusaka urban can access police services within 5
kilometers of their residences. For example, the CSD coordinator Lusaka Divisional
Headquarters stated that the development of police posts and neighborhood watch
scheme has been very rapid in Zambia especially in Lusaka urban where there are over
120 police posts.
However, despite the existence of police posts and NWAs in most communities, the
study observed that most of the structures housing these police posts are “ramshackle”,
and not fit to be a public office. For instance, some structures are an old Community Hall
or metal containers with no toilets and piped water. This has worked as a disadvantage on
the part of officers working in these communities as it has demotivated them to work
effectively. Apart from unfit structures, these police posts have very few officers to run
the shifts and they work long hours for instance, from 1800hours to 0800hours the
following day hence affecting their effectiveness. Further, the NWAs members lack
equipment like handcuffs, raincoats and boots to use when assisting police officers in
policing crime.
The co-operation of the public in these NWAs does point to a desire to see a better
policed community by the police and there is no doubt that, despite the difficulties, the
neighborhood watch schemes are generally valued and are not seen as unwelcome foreign
imports. Therefore, the success of these police posts and neighborhood watch schemes in
Lusaka urban lies largely in the way the police and local people are mobilized. As far as
the Zambia police service is concerned it has improved the public’s perception of the
police as exemplified, among other things, by the absence of mob justice in many
communities.

3.3.4 Sensitization and Awareness Programmes

Another initiative by the Zambia police service was the programme for enhancing public
perception of the police which consisted of police-community relations programmes.
These programmes do not change the basic method of policing; but of reaching out into
the community. Police-community relations are essential to crime prevention
programmes as they enable citizens to become more aware of their neighborhood and of
places where crime can occur. This is the means or method of reaching out to the
community and it is based on the premise that the police and the community should
jointly accept the responsibility for the maintenance of public order, peace and security in
their area.
The police service came up with programmes of reaching out to schools and the
community through the School Liaison Unit, Radio and Television programmes
(Community Forum) through the Public Relations Department, and public-speaking
programmes through the Community Safety Unit. In collaboration with the public and
private media institutions, the police conduct radio and television programmes such as
the “Police and the Community” aimed at sensitizing the community on various issues
such as community safety and security. In addition, the police designs and publishes
crime awareness posters, brochures, leaflets and pamphlets in the community. By
educating and sensitizing the different stakeholders for instance, the business people and
home owners on the effective security techniques and developing a good police-
community rapport, citizens feel safer and have less fear in dealing with the police. This
programme by the Zambia police service has proved to have yielded good results as it has
increased the citizen’s cooperation in providing information to assist in law enforcement.
Further, there is more voluntary compliance with the law by the citizens, improved
relations with the local communities, and increased community support for police.
The sensitization and awareness programmes were initiated because according to the
situation analysis prior to the reformation of the Zambia police service and the adoption
of community policing strategy in 1995, the prevailing attitude was that police only
existed to arrest and to torture; they can never be friendly and few criminals were handed
over to them by the members of the public. This was an indication that the police were
not receiving enough cooperation from the community due to lack of rapport between the
police and the community. For instance, majority of criminal cases were not reported to
police especially gender based offences like rape and defilement. But with increased
cooperation through police-community relations, members of the public can now feel free
and comfortable to bring complaints to the police and also offer information that could be
valuable to the police. The coordinator at Lusaka Division Police Headquarters stated that
as far as the CSD is concerned this strategy has improved the public’s perception of the
police. The police service associates this programme to the cooperation that has existed
between the police and the community for the past 15 years.
As a policing measure to fight crime in Zambia, the community policing strategy has
been in place for the last 15 years. However, to the contrary, on the ground the Zambia
police still use the old strategies of fighting crime especially in the case of addressing
violent crimes. For instance, the response to armed robbery on an organized scale by the
Flying Squad, Crack Squad Unit and the SCORPION based at Lusaka Divisional
Headquarters. With its recruitment of informers, the Flying Squad and the SCORPION
have been very successful in breaking up the crime groups or driving them away. Yet the
cost was loss of accountability and, perhaps inevitably, accusations that the criminal
elements had corrupted the police officers attached to these two units. Further, the
military style ‘shoot to kill’ policy against armed robbers clearly weakens the judicial
system.
Despite some weaknesses, most people interviewed are indeed glad that organized
crime is slowly going down. Most indicated that these units especially the Flying Squad
which is well known to most people, did a good job where mostly general duty police
officers had failed; but the methods they are using are not very good. However, some
members of the public and even police officers have criticized the Flying Squad and
SCORPION unit in investigating what might be termed ‘ordinary’ crime. They feel these
crimes can be effectively handled by the Criminal Investigations Department at
divisional, district, station and post level. Hence most officers feel their work is
increasingly being undertaken by these units.
Though, this type of policing is very much against the ideals and the essence of
community policing in Zambia as it turns to be militaristic and paramilitary policing.
However, the world wide trend toward paramilitary policing has been noted by several
commentators (for instance, Kraska and Kappelar, 1997; Jefferson, 1990; Wadington,
1991). Militarization is the state’s response to social disorder or the fear of it which is
not achievable through community policing. The disorder may arise from criminal or
political groups. Therefore, the part of explanation for the militarized response by the
Zambia police service has been attributed by the public outcries against the rise in armed
robberies hence instilling a sense of insecurity. These units were set up due to the
protective failure by the general duties and CID officers found at police stations and posts
to deal with armed robberies and serious crimes.
It is also important to recognize that most community policing programmes that have
been put in place in most parts of Lusaka urban are police initiated hence police driven.
The crime prevention programmes have not taken a multi- agency strategy approach. For
instance, according to the study findings from most of the key informants especially from
police circles, even the few neighborhood watch associations that exist are a result of
police efforts because very few members of the public in Lusaka urban have taken keen
interest in crime prevention in their communities. The city council or the local authority
is not even, closely associated in ensuring community safety by creating an enabling
environment for community participation. To reduce crime, something needs to be done
with regards to collaboration between the police, the community and other stake-holders.
In case of robbery, burglary and theft, for example, the police could patrol the area, and if
called to the scene of crime, arrest the offender. With the assistance of the police, the
courts could convict and sentence the offender. In the same way the police, with the
assistance of members of the community and other stake-holders in terms of crime
intelligence and foot patrols, proper roads and street lighting especially in shanty
compounds, can help the police to prevent, detect as well as apprehend the suspects.
The improving of street lighting, planning the layout of parking lot and where the
shopping center is to be situated, cutting the long grasses and many more, can not be
undertaken by police, they are the functions of local government, local businesses,
owners of shopping center and the community at large. As it is emphasized that the
principle behind crime prevention strategy is to engage the assistance of all those who
can (and should) help to solve crime problem. Since no single agency is responsible for
all the elements that cause crime, a joint effect is needed. This is what is referred to as the
‘partnership approach’. Partnership brings together those who have something to
contribute.

3.4 CONCLUSION

The limitations of the old strategies that were used by the Zambia police from 1970s to
early 1990s, which were more militaristic and reactive, meant that the Zambia police
force then was unable to provide crime protection and crime investigation for all the
citizens. As a result, another policing strategy in the form of community policing was
adopted that encouraged greater participation of individuals in the community in the
crime prevention programmes by the Zambia police service in 1995. This strategy aimed
at being a democratic way by bringing the public closer to the police, hence becoming
accountable and professional. As stated in section one of this chapter, some of the major
positive reforms that enhanced the police effectiveness in Zambia police were the
creation of Community Service Division which oversees all community policing
programmes, Research and Planning Department which deals with all research work, data
collection and processing in the Zambia Police Service.
 The creation of neighbourhood watch associations and community police posts nearly
in all residential areas of Lusaka to encourage community participation through foot
patrols. The police thought the general public was not kept adequately informed on the
security situation in the country, what the police was doing to reduce the high crime
levels and issues to do with the Zambia Police Reform Programme. Hence the Public
Relations Office was improved upon in the reformation of the police service, it did not
only concentrate on issuing daily crime incident reports but its role was expanded to
include the publication of the “police news” that carried stories of what the police was
doing to work closely with the community. The public relations office also usurped the
role of promoting the good image of the Zambia Police Service through the running of
programmes both on radio and television such as the “Police and You” and currently the
programmes have been changed to “Police and the Community”, and Community Forum.
The study however, indicated that communities are not fully involved because they are
not consulted by the police on how they should be policed. Further, they are unable to
monitor and evaluate police effectiveness as a result there is no proper police
accountability by the members of the community though the government created Police
Public Complaint Authority whose recommendations are mostly undermined by the
police superiors as stated in section two of chapter three. In addition, training in
community policing programmes are unheard of in many residential areas.
Finally it is important to state that most of the discussions within this chapter have
been concerned to outline the assumptions underpinning strategies to crime prevention
that encourage community participation and accountability. However, it is indicated that
the Zambia police has not completely abandoned the old strategies used in policing
crime, hence the existence of the Flying Squad which are militaristic and reactive in
nature to supplement the failures of community policing strategy.
CHAPTER FOUR: THE IMPACT OF COMMUNITY POLICING

4.1 INTRODUCTION
The impact of community policing on crime is discussed in section one of this chapter.
Today both the print and electronic media as well as the public outcry suggest there is
much crime, but there is no way of knowing how much crime there is. It was the purpose
of this study in this section to ask such questions and seek answers to them through the
systematic analysis of empirical data. In order to establish the impact of community
policing on crime in Zambia, the study in this section presented the findings of the study
on crime levels before and after community policing was introduced in Zambia. Further,
the study has described and discussed a number of related issues that define the problem
context of the community policing impact analysis on crime, including the need for the
nature of crime problems including the extent of crime, the trends and distribution of
crime to be analyzed.
To achieve this, in this section, seven (7) categories of crimes which include murder,
forcible rape, robbery/aggravated robbery, burglary and theft, house breaking, theft,
assault and other breakings have been used. The seven categories are referred to as
serious crimes and are representative of the criminal tendency. As a way of ascertaining
the trends of crime we computed change in the crime rates for each of the seven (7)
categories during the last 15 years from 1993 to 2009. Hence to test the effectiveness of
community policing in reducing the crime rate, the study experiences of three groups of
Lusaka urban residential areas are systematically analyzed and these are high (Chaisa and
Chipata compounds), middle (Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga) and low densely
populated areas of (Woodlands and Kabulonga) residential areas.
On the other hand, in section two (2) of this chapter, the study analyzed and discussed
the findings on the impact of community policing on public attitude towards the police on
various issues that affect effectiveness and completeness in the implementation of
community policing. Hence in order to establish the impact of community policing on
these important issues the study looks at trust and relationship between the police and
community, police performance, victimization and fear of crime, level of security
concern, human rights observance and the composition of Zambia Police service in
relation to gender before and after community policing was introduced in 1995. It is
further, noted that the situation analysis before community policing was introduced, the
police were rated negatively in almost all of the above stated issues.
Finally, in section three (3) of this chapter, the study discusses the challenges that
have negatively affected the implementation of community policing. Therefore, the
central objective of this chapter is to analyze systematically and discuss the findings on
the impact or effectiveness of community policing strategy on the tendency of crime
incidence, public attitude towards crime and the police. In summary, the study in this
chapter looks at the success and failure factors as well as challenges facing the
community policing strategy, specifically in the last fifteen (15) years, during which time
community policing strategy was implemented.

4.2 THE IMPACT OF COMMUNITY POLICING ON CRIME

4.2.1Changing Crime Levels

It is very obvious that opinion is divided among the public and the police officers about
crime levels in residential areas of Lusaka urban district. The conflicting views of ‘high’
and ‘low’ rates are not resolved by the Annual Crime Report published by the Zambia
Police Service, though in Zambia it is not a practice for the members of the public and
even police officers to access the Annual Crime Reports because they have never been
published for so many years for public consumption. As stated by many people, both in
the print and electronic media and other forums, it is known that there is much crime in
Lusaka urban district. But there is no way of knowing exactly how much crime there is in
the communities of Lusaka urban district because not all crimes committed are reported
to and recorded by the police nor can all crimes be detected by the police. Although the
accuracy of crime statistics has been questioned, the crime statistics collected and
compiled from selected police stations and police posts in Lusaka urban communities are
undoubtedly the best source available to measure the magnitude of crime in Lusaka
urban. Our crime analysis has its central thrust based on the 7 categories of the crimes.
However, other addition categories of crimes were also compiled and they include other
breakings and theft of motor vehicle.

The Extent of Crime in Lusaka Urban Residential Areas

Table 4.1: Crime Statistics in 7 Categories of Crime in Lusaka Urban District

Residential Areas, 2007-2008

Offence 2007 2008

Aggravated Robbery 999 375
Robbery 350 374
Rape/Defilement 162 162
Murder 162 124
Burglary and Theft 1083 1175
Assault OABH 4718 5701
Theft 4290 4559
TOTAL 11,602 12,470

Source: Lusaka Division, Zambia Police Service

 Figure 4.4: Bar Chart Showing Distribution of Crime Statistics Levels, in
Lusaka Urban District Residential Areas, 2007 and 2008

6000 Aggravated
Robbery
5000 Robbery

4000 Rape/Defilement

3000 Murder

2000 Burglary and Theft

Assault OABH
1000
Theft
0
2007 2008

Source: Computed from Lusaka Division Police Headquarters Crime Statistics

Despite the availability of the data in form of statistics, the statistics on crime rates in
table 4.1 and figure 4.1 are associated with under reporting to the police because of lack
of access, embarrassment, fear of the police and desire for speed justice. But in addition,
there is a problem as admitted in the inner circle of the police service (key informants)
that the police setup currently is yet to grasp the importance of crime statistics. Further
many police officers in charge of crime that is Criminal Investigations Officers (CIOs) do
not send accurate crime figures to their Divisional headquarters. During the study it came
to the study attention that the data presented in table 4.1 only included cases taken to
court, excluding withdrawn cases, un followed up reports, and where criminals are not
known. Further, it also came to the study’s attention that most cases such as theft and
assault cases which are usually withdrawn from police posts were not included on the
crime statistics.
Due to under reporting associated with police statistics in the above table and figure,
the study was indebted to carry out its own findings at some selected police stations and
community police posts. However, what was found at most of these stations and police
posts Crime Registers (CR) and Occurrence Books (OB) was contrary from what was
reported from Lusaka Divisional Headquarters and it was noted that the crime statistics
presented in table 5 was for entire Lusaka Province that is including rural areas as well.
Therefore, the tables below show the study findings at some of the selected police
stations and community police posts in Lusaka Urban District Residential areas.
Table 4.2: Cases reported and dealt by Woodlands Police Station in 2007, 2008
and 2009.

OFFENCE 2OO7 2008 2009

Robbery 36 13 29
Murder 17 16 9
Burglary and Theft 91 103 167
House Breaking and Theft 58 61 83
Theft 493 617 609
Assaults 524 581 589
Rape/Defilement 16 23 31
TOTAL 1,235 1,414 1,517
Source: Woodlands Police Station

Figure 4. 5: Bar Chart Showing Number of Cases reported and dealt by Woodlands
Police Station in 2007, 2008 and 2009.

700
Robbery

600
Murder
500
Burglary and Theft
400

300 Breaking and Theft

200 Theft

100
Assaults

0
2007 2008 2009 Rape/Defilement

Source: Computed from Woodlands Police Station Crime Statistics

The statistics in table 4.2 figure 4. 2 were collected at Woodlands police station and the
trends of the crime statistics were that almost all crimes reported at Woodlands police
station were on the increase. Therefore, if the above statistics were to be generalized in
the whole Lusaka urban district, then they clearly show that police statistics are under
reported.
Further, on the case of defilement there was an opportunity to visit University
Teaching Hospital (UTH) Public Relations Office. The information the study got on
defilement cases received or reported for medical attention was as well alarming. For
instance, from January, 2010 to June 2010, the hospital had already received reports and
treated the victims of defilement exceeding 400 cases. These are the cases received by
UTH only what about other designed referral clinics. This is a clear indication that
despite sensitization programmes and stiff sentences put in place people are still able to
have carnal knowledge with the minors hence the crime is not reducing but increasing.

The Distribution of Crime Rate in Lusaka Urban Residential Areas before and after
Community Policing.

Table 4.6: distribution of Burglary, House Breaking and Other Breakings in High,
Middle and Low Density Residential Areas of Lusaka Urban District before
Community Policing.

Burglary and Theft

House Breaking Other Breakings
And Theft
Year High Middle Low High Middle Low High Middle Low
1993 113 48 13 25 29 13 49 30 13
Source: Chipata, Chaisa, Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police posts and Woodlands
and Emmasdale police stations.

Figure 4.3: Bar Chart Showing Distribution of Burglary, House Breaking and Other
Breakings in High, Middle and Low Density Residential Areas of Lusaka Urban
District before Community Policing.

1.2 Burglary and Theft

High
Burglary and Theft
1 Middle
Burglary and Theft
Hundreds of cases reported

0.8 Low
House Breaking and
Theft High2
0.6
House Breaking and
Theft Middle2
0.4
House Breaking and
Theft Low2
0.2 Other Breakings
High3

0 Other Breakings
Middle3
1993
Other Breakings Low3
Table 4.4: The distribution of Burglary, House Breaking and Other Breakings in
High, Middle and Low Density Residential Areas of Lusaka Urban District after
Community Policing.

Burglary and Theft

House Breaking Other Breakings
And Theft
Year High Middle Low High Middle Low High Middle Low
1996 104 41 17 22 21 5 39 14 0
1998 134 27 13 32 11 15 60 8 0
2002 80 31 9 52 12 4 47 22 13
2006 134 26 6 15 7 7 39 23 5
2008 118 34 5 50 5 3 56 13 8
2009 151 28 7 65 14 5 72 19 7
Source: Chipata, Chaisa, Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police posts and Woodlands
and Emmasdale police stations

Figure 4.4: Bar Chart showing distribution of burglary, house breaking and other
breakings in high, middle and low density residential areas of Lusaka Urban
District after Community Policing.
1.6 Burglary and Theft High

1.4
Burglary and Theft Middle
Hundreds of cases reported

1.2
Burglary and Theft Low

1
House Breaking and Theft
0.8
House Breaking and Theft Middle2
0.6
House Breaking and Theft Low2
0.4
Other Breakings High3
0.2
Other Breakings Middle3
0
1996 1997 2001 2006 2008 2009 Other Breakings Low3

Source: Computed from Chipata, Chaisa, Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police posts
and Woodlands and Emmasdale police stations Crime Statistics.
Table 4.5: The distribution of Theft, Robbery, and Aggravated Robbery statistics:
High, Middle, and Low density Residential areas of Lusaka urban district before
Community Policing.

Thefts Robberies Aggravated

Robberies
Year High Middle Low High Middle Low High Middle Low
1993 247 113 31 22 17 6 21 19 11
Source: Chipata, Chaisa, Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police posts and Woodlands
and Emmasdale police stations.

Figure 4.5: Bar Chart Showing the Distribution of Theft, Robbery, and Aggravated
Robbery statistics: High, Middle, and Low Density Residential Areas of Lusaka
urban district Before Community Policing.

Theft High
3
Theft Middle
2.5
Hundreds cases reported

Theft Low
2
Robberies High2
1.5
Robberies
1 Middle2

Robberies Theft
0.5 Low2

Aggravated
0 Robberies High3

1993
Table 4.6: Distribution of Theft, Robbery, and Aggravated Robbery Statistics:
High, Middle, and Low Density Residential Areas of Lusaka Urban District after
Community policing.

Thefts Robberies
Aggravated
Robberies
Year High Middle Low High Middle Low High Middle Low
1995 229 131 43 23 25 11 24 27 9
1998 281 151 67 46 39 17 26 31 19
2001 357 166 80 48 58 21 31 34 21
2002 380 158 72 15 61 15 29 37 23
2006 317 171 86 13 7 13 21 43 18
2008 345 195 118 9 72 28 33 42 22
2009 465 211 143 29 75 32 22 47 25
Source: Chipata, Chaisa, Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police posts and Woodlands
and Emmasdale police stations.

Figure 7.6: Bar Chart Showing the Distribution of Theft, Robbery, and Aggravated
Robbery statistics: High, Middle, and Low Density Residential Areas of Lusaka
urban district after Community Policing.

5
Theft
4.5
Theft Middle
4
Hundreds of cases reported

3.5 Theft Low

3 Robberies
2.5
Robberies Middle2
2
1.5 Robberies Theft Low2

1 Aggravated Robberies High3

0.5
Aggravated Robberies Middle3
0
1995 1998 2002 2006 2008 2009 Aggravated Robberies Low3

Source: Computed from Chipata, Chaisa, Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police
posts and Woodlands and Emmasdale police stations Crime Statistics.
Table 4.7: The distribution of Rape, Assault, and Murder statistics: In High,
Middle, and Low Densely Residential Areas in Lusaka Urban District before
Community Policing.

Rape Assaults Murder

Year High Middle Low High Middle Low High Middle Low
1993 6 5 2 73 30 13 5 3 2
Source: Chipata, Chaisa, Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police posts
and Woodlands and Emmasdale police stations.

Figure 4.7: Bar Chart Showing the Distribution of Rape, Assault, and Murder
Statistics: In High, Middle, and Low Densely Residential Areas in Lusaka Urban
District before Community Policing.

0.8 Rape High

Hundred number of cases reported

0.7 RapeMiddle

0.6
Rape Low
0.5
Assaults High2
0.4
Assaults Middle2
0.3
AssaultsLow2
0.2

0.1 Murder High3

0 Murder Middle3
1993
Murder Low3

Source: Chipata, Chaisa, Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police posts

and Woodlands and Emmasdale police stations.
Table 4.8: Distribution of Rape, Assault, and Murder statistics: In High, Middle,
and Low Density Residential Areas in Lusaka Urban District after Community
Policing.

Rape Assaults Murder

Year High Middle Low High Middle Low High Middle Low
1995 3 1 5 129 46 21 1 4 5
1998 3 13 4 270 73 34 5 2 1
2004 15 12 5 414 126 47 9 4 3
2007 nil 6 3 495 187 68 8 5 3
2008 2 11 8 473 191 63 2 4 2
2009 15 10 7 481 201 77 8 7 5

Source: Chipata, Chaisa, Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police posts and
Woodlands and Emmasdale police stations.

Figure 4.8: Bar Chart Showing the Distribution of Rape, Assault, and Murder
Statistics: In High, Middle, and Low Densely Residential Areas in Lusaka Urban
District after Community Policing.

6
Rape High

5 RapeMiddle
Hundreds of cases recorded

Rape Low
4
Assaults High2
3
Assaults Middle2

2 AssaultsLow2

Murder High3
1
Murder Middle3
0
Murder Low3
1995 1998 2004 2007 2009

Source: Computed from Chipata, Chaisa, Nyumba Yanga and Kabulonga police posts,
Woodlands and Emmasdale police stations Crime Statistics

The data presented in above tables and bar charts clearly indicate that community
policing impact on crime in the past 15 years in Lusaka urban district residential areas
vary from community to community. The high, middle and low densely populated
communities’ difference in the crime rates shows a wide variation among the different
criminal offences. For example in 2009, table 4.4, 4.6 and 4.8 shows the highly densely
populated areas of Chipata and Chaisa compounds crime rates ranges from the high of
465 for theft, 481 for assault, 22 for aggravated robbery, 29 for robbery, to the low of 15
for rape and 8 for murder respectively. The middle densely populated areas of
Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga ranges from the high of 211 for theft, 191 for assault, 47
for aggravated robberies, 75 for robberies, and 10 for rape. Figure 4.4, 4.6 and 4.8 shows
the pattern of crime rate distribution among the high, middle and low densely populated
areas of Lusaka urban from 1995 to 2009. On the other hand table 4.3, 4.5 and 4.7 as well
as figure 4.3, 4.5 and 4.7 shows the distribution of crime level in 1993 before community
policing was introduced and implemented.

In general, the crime rates in the above mentioned tables and figures have clearly
indicated that crime rates are much higher in shanty compounds which are highly densely
populated areas than in middle and low densely populated areas in every crime category.
Except that aggravated robberies and robberies rate are higher in middle densely
populated areas than other areas. The crime rates in high density populated areas are
higher in every category than those in middle and low density populated areas except for
aggravated robberies and robberies. On the other extreme, aggravated robbery, robbery,
rape and murder in shanty compounds show a relatively small difference from those in
middle and low density areas and particularly the murder rate in shanty compounds
shows the least difference from that in middle and low density areas.

It can then be concluded that from the above tables especially tables and figures after the
introduction and implementation of community policing , the crime rate has increased the
fastest in shanty compounds or highly densely populated areas, followed by middle
densely populated areas, then low density populated areas. During the last 15 year period,
the total crime rate has increased more than 3 times in shanty compounds and middle
density areas, and slightly less than 2 times in low density areas. The fact that the crime is
increasing fastest in shanty communities and that the crime rate is highest in shanty
compounds indicates that the problem of crime is not only more serious in shanty areas
than elsewhere, but also the crime problem in shanty compounds is getting worse faster
than elsewhere. Murder, rape, house breaking and theft, burglary and theft, theft, assault
OABH have increased faster in high density areas than elsewhere. However, aggravated
robberies, robberies and other breakings increased faster in middle densely populated
areas than shanty areas, but the increase rate in low densely populated areas was even
faster than that of the highly densely populated areas.

Table 4.9: Comparison of Crime Rates in 1995, 2001, and 2009 at Emmasdale Police
Station After Community Policing.

Offence 1995 2001 2009

Rape/Defilement 3 19 31
 Theft of Motor 1 17 13
Vehicle
Theft 229 257 609
Burglary 154 129 199
Breaking 105 70 111
Robbery/Aggravated 23 48 57
Robbery
Assault 129 275 689
Murder 1 3 9
Total 645 818 1,718

Source: Emmasdale police stations.

Figure 4.9: Bar Chart Showing Comparison of Crime Rates in 1995, 2001, and 2009
at Emmasdale Police Station in Lusaka Urban District.

2
Thousands of cases reported

1.8 1995
1.6
1.4
1.2
2001
1
0.8
0.6
0.4 2009
0.2
0

Source: Emmasdale police stations.

As a way of ascertaining the trends of crime in Lusaka urban district, the trends from
table 4.9 comprise 8 categories of crime offenses during the last 15 years covering 1995,
2001 and 2009 collected from Emmasdale police station. The Bar Chart in Figure 4.9
shows that the crime rates were raising in almost every category. For instance, theft, rape,
assault, murder, breakings, theft of motor vehicle, robbery and defilement from 1995 to
2001 at Emmasdale police station never showed any signs of reducing as expected in the
objectives of community policing to reduce crime by 50 per cent by the year 2000, but
instead it was increasing. Though, in some crimes such as burglary, breakings and
robberies there was some reduction in rates. Further in the period covering 2001 and
2009 the trend was similar in the sense that in some cases it was rising while in some
cases it was reducing though not at the rate of 50 per cent as expected in the objectives of
community policing set in 1995. Therefore, it has been noted that the total reported
crimes at Emmasdale police station has been increasing for instance, from 645 reported
cases in 1995 to 818 reported cases in 2001 and to 1,718 reported cases in 2009. Hence it
is showing that crime in Emmasdale area covering 1995 2001 and 2009 increased by
more than hundred percent [100%].
The number of criminal offenses reported at Emmasdale police station varied greatly
among the 8 categories, ranging from the high of 199 for burglaries to the low of 9 for the
murders (willful homicides) in 2009. In general, the number of crimes against persons
(murder, rape, defilement, aggravated robbery and robbery) is markedly smaller than that
against properties (burglary, theft, breakings). However, the fact that the criminal
offences against persons are less frequent than those against properties does not suggest
that personal crimes constitute a less serious problem. The truth is that personal crimes
have a more terrorizing effect on the victims than property crimes and the damages are
incalculable, often inflicting a lasting tragedy to the victims or their relatives.
In summary it should be noted that the crime statistics presented in the above tables
and figures may not entirely represent the Lusaka urban district, but they include the
crime statistics in high, middle and low density populated areas of Lusaka urban hence
they can be generalized as a representation of Lusaka urban district. This is because the
crime statistics as a whole are a mixture of all types of communities of Lusaka urban,
since they vary in size, population and social economic characteristics.

Comparison of Crime before and after Community policing from both members of
the public and police officers

Table 4.10: Responses from Members of the Public and Police Officers before and
After community policing

ISSUE RESPONSE
The crime rate before Members of Community Police officers
the introduction of 130 indicated increasing 100 indicated increasing
Community Policing

The crime rate after the Members of Community Police officers

introduction of 43 indicated decreasing 95 indicated decreasing
Community Policing 57 indicated increasing 2 indicated Increasing
30 indicated stood still 3 indicated stood still
Figure 4.10: Number of Respondents from the members of the public

Figure 4.11: Number of Respondents from Police officers

Figure 4.10 and 4.11 reveals that it is not only police statistics and public outcry on
various media forums both electronically and print media that shows that crime has been
increasing in Lusaka urban but also the majority of the respondents of the study did
indicate that crime was increasing in their neighborhoods especially in middle density
areas of Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga and high density areas of Chipata and Chaisa
compounds. On crime levels before community policing was introduced, all the
respondents that is both the members of public and police officers indicated that crime
kept on increasing. Further on the study question asked: “In the past 15 years with
community policing in place, do you feel the crime rate in your community has been
increasing, decreasing, or has remained the same as it was?”
In response to the study question, in low density populated areas of Kabulonga and
Woodlands 9 (22.5 percent) answered “increasing”; 19 (47.5 percent) indicated
“decreasing”; and 12 (30 percent) said it “remained the same or stood still”. While in
middle densely populated areas of Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga 21 (52.5 percent) said
that it was increasing, and 12 (30 percent) said it was decreasing and only 7 (17.5
percent) said it stood still. Furthermore, in high density areas of Chaisa and Chipata
compounds 31 (62 percent) said crime was increasing in their area, while 9 (18 percent)
said it was “decreasing”, and 10 (20 percent) said crime remained the same or as it was
before community policing was introduced in 1995. To the contrary, in response to the
same question, police officers operating from all the selected communities indicated that
since the introduction of community policing in 1995, crime in most of the communities
has been decreasing.
Furthermore, the research asked “In their community was there more crime, less crime
or the same as compared to other communities of Lusaka urban district with community
policing in place? In low density populated areas of Woodlands and Kabulonga 7 (17.5
percent) answered “more”; 21 (52.5 percent) said “less”; and 12 (30 percent) said the
“same”. While in middle density areas 20 (50 percent) said “more”, 12 (30 percent) said
“less” and 8 (20 percent) said the “same”. Further in high density areas of Chaisa and
Chipata compounds 29 (58 percent) said there was more, 9 (18 percent) said it was less
and 12 (24 percent) said crime was the same as compared to other communities of
Lusaka urban district.
Therefore, the study concluded that there were more people in low density areas of
Kabulonga and Woodlands who felt their neighborhoods had lesser crime as compared to
people in Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga as well as people from Chaisa and Chipata
compounds. While it was the opposite in middle densely populated areas (Emmasdale
and Nyumba Yanga) and high densely populated areas (Chaisa and Chipata compounds)
where more people believe there is more crime in their communities than elsewhere in
Lusaka. This was also supported by police officers who operate in low densely populated
areas who indicated that in Woodlands and Kabulonga there was less crime as compared
to high density populated areas of Chaisa and Chipata compounds. Further, police
officers who operate from high densely populated areas stated that even if crime has been
reducing, there is still more crime in the areas they operated as compared to areas like
Woodlands, Kabulonga and other middle densely populated areas.

However, despite the study suggesting that crime rates have been growing, the study
also noted that there was a greater willingness to report crime to the police by the
members of the community. This willingness may be part of the 1995 transformation of
the Zambia police through community policing that serve the public or it may be a
response to sensitization programmes among the public and the police that have made
them more wiling to treat seriously certain crimes such as those involving gender
violence, rape, and defilement. Further, the rise in crime could be suggested as a result of
police presence in the form of community police posts that have been created in most
communities hence people reporting to the police whenever there is crime committed.
For instance, today nearly in all the communities there is a police post or station that is
taking the police closer to the community.
In addition, the study revealed that of the 18 percent members of the community from
high densely populated areas, 30 percent from middle densely populated areas and 47.5
percent from low densely populated areas, and police officers who indicated that the rate
of crime was decreasing in their areas, most attributed this decrease to the emergence of
community police posts and neighborhood watch associations in their communities and
other programmes that have encouraged the flow of information between the police and
community. Therefore, this has motivated members of the public to report crimes which
never used to be reported because the police presence was not there in their area or it was
too far. The police are now closer to the community because of the increase in the
numbers of police posts at the local level.
Though the trend is not a clear cut, the study may conclude from this evidence that
there are lesser police officers and people particularly in low density populated areas who
think that crime is increasing lately than those from middle and highly densely populated
areas of Lusaka. However, it must be noted as well that other people may have suggested
that crime was increasing in their communities while facts on the ground are that crime
was decreasing, but since they still have negative attitude towards the police, then to them
crime is not decreasing.

Progress made in the fight of Crime after Community Policing

Table 4.11A: Responses from Members of the Public.

Response Made % Made % Lost % Lost %

much some some much
progress progress grounds grounds
Police 39 30 48 37 24 18 19 15
progress

Table 4.11B: Responses from Police officers.

Response Made % Made % Lost % Lost %

much some some much
progress progress grounds grounds
Police 45 45 41 41 11 11 3 3
Progress
There are less people who believe that the police with community policing as strategy to
fight crime are losing the fight against crime than those who believe it is making
progress. Hence, the study asked the respondents if they believed that the police today in
its fight against crime “made much progress”, “some progress”. “lost some ground” or
“lost much ground”. As a result out of 130 respondents from the community, table 4.11A,
shows that 39 (30 percent) members of the community said the police today has made
much progress in its fight against crime, 48 (37 percent) said the police have made some
progress, while 24 (18 percent said the police lost some grounds and 19 (15 percent) said
the police has lost much ground in its fight against crime in Lusaka urban. While on the
hand, out of the 100 police officers, as indicated in table 4.11B, 45 (45 percent) said the
police has made much progress and 41 (41 percent) said the police today made some
progress in the fight against as compared 11 (11 percent) and 3 (3 percent) who said the
police today has lost some ground and lost much ground in the fight against crime in
Lusaka urban respectively.
Further, there are fewer people who believe that the nation’s law enforcement, through
community policing does not really discourage crime than those who believe it does.
Therefore, the study asked the respondents whether or not they felt the law enforcement
system of community policing (the introduction of police post, neighborhood watch
scheme and public relations programmes) in Zambia worked to discourage people from
committing crimes. There were more than half of the respondents 88 (68 percent) who
believed it did discourage crime as compared to those who believed it did not discourage
crime 42 (32 percent), in other words to them it meant that the system is not working. In
supporting the above view that community policing discourages people from committing
crime, out of 100 police officers, 86 (86 percent) police officers respondents indicated
that community policing indeed discouraged people from committing crime compared to
only 14 (14 percent) who indicated that the strategy did not discourage people from
committing crime.
Most respondents indicated that if the community and police were to work very
closely then crime can be discouraged. The respondents who supported community
policing strategy to be very effective in reducing crime rates in many communities, said
so because they believe criminals and those who are to be criminals live within the
community and are known by the people in that community. However, only if the
implementation is done earnestly with the full involvement of the public or community in
the prevention of crime through programmes like the neighborhood watch schemes,
hence able to patrol and provide crime intelligence to the police, then crime in the
communities could be reduced. In the current form it has not been able to produce the
desired results because the implementation has been very poor hence making it
ineffective.

4.3 PUBLIC ATTITUDE TOWARDS CRIME AND POLICE OFFICERS AFTER

COMMUNITY POLICING

Victimization and Fear of crime

Table 4.12: Summary on some of the responses on victimization and fear of crime

RESPONDENTS COMMUITY POLICE OFFICERS

Yes % No % Yes % No %
Response
123 95 7 5 N/A 0 N/A 0
Victim of Crime
101 78 29 22 81 81 19 19
Reported Crime to the Police
Any area in their community they are 75 58 55 42 70 70 30 30
afraid in the night

Figure 4.12: Bar Chart Showing the Distribution of Victimization and Fear of
Crime.
1.4
1.2
Number of Hundreds
respondents

1
0.8 Public Yes
0.6 Public No
0.4 Police Yes
0.2 Police No
0
Victim of crime Reported Crime to the Any area in their
Police community they are
afraid in the night

As stated by most respondents in table 4.12, as well as indicated in figure 4.12, in Lusaka
urban residential areas, it is clearly indicated that ‘crime’ was now becoming one of the
serious problems. Therefore, people are worried about crime and violence, both of which
are closely interrelated. Further, police statistics show increased numbers of reported
crime in Lusaka urban, particularly cases of armed robbery, theft, rape, assault and
defilement (sexual intercourse with someone under 18). For instance, in this study, crime
is increasingly becoming the most worrying problem because many people are concerned
and live in fear. In the selected residential areas of Lusaka, both fear and victimization
rates remain high. Therefore, according to our study in selected Lusaka urban residential
areas concerning victimization, it was revealed that 123 (95 percent) members of the
public who responded had been victims of crime or experienced crime in their life time or
had known someone who had been a victim of rape, defilement, theft, burglary, robbery
and physical assault or in simple terms violent crime. On the contrary, only 7 (5 percent)
were not victims of crime. It is important, however, to disaggregate the reports of crime
and disorder on a gender basis. It was discovered in our study that female respondents
fear most crimes like rape, defilements and assaults which endanger their physical
capabilities. In short crime against the person and property is an ever-present reality in
Lusaka urban communities and one where they themselves must take responsibility for
security against it.
The study also revealed that in terms of fear of crime, in areas where neighborhood
watch associations exist and are very active, the response from our respondents suggested
that the fear of crime has reduced. This has been so because neighborhoods watch
association members in these communities have been sensitizing their fellow members of
the public about their existence. According to them this has resulted into three major
things: firstly criminals have been aware of their activeness; secondly, because of the
publicity and knowing that criminals will refrain from operating in their communities,
fear of crime by the residents of the community will be reduced leading to an increase in
the property value in the area; the publicity will make more people be aware of their
community responsibility leading to active neighborhood watch associations.
Furthermore, the study had an opportunity to interview one important key informant in
a low density area with a lot of high value of property. From the interview, it was evident
that most residents are worried about the value of property coming down once crime rates
increase. This interview further revealed that most neighborhood watch members did not
have much confidence in the police to patrol alone and prevent crime. The key informant
said: “if you leave police officers alone, they will just go to drink alcohol, after all they
do not stay in the area and they also look at the residents of this area to be rich hence can
afford private security”. Therefore, the citizens’ patrols add credence to crime prevention
patrols thus reducing fear of crime among community members.
On crime reporting, our study revealed that the majority who were victims of crime
reported to the police. For example, over 101 (78 percent) respondents who were victims
of crime reported to the police station as compared to 29 (22 percent) who did not report
to the police. This was also supported by most police officers who stated that, in most
cases, members of the community who were victims of crime always reported to the
police. For instance, 81 (81 percent) police officers indicated that crime was always
reported to the police as compared to only 19 (19 percent) police officers who indicated
that most crimes were not reported to the police. Some of the reasons the members of
community gave as to why they reported to the police is that, despite police set backs
they still have confidence and trust in the police as law enforcers. Others indicated that
the reason why they reported to the police is because they wanted their cases to be on
record in case in future they happen to find their stolen property hence they never wanted
to be queried by police officers.
Those who are afraid of street crimes and change their habits because of fear not only
account for a substantial proportion of the population but a proportion that is increasing,
according to the research findings. Among a number of research questions, the study
asked the question: “Is there any area within your community where you would be afraid
to walk alone at night? The responses in low density areas like Woodlands and
Kabulonga 13 out 40 (32 percent) of the respondents answered “yes” and 27 (68 per cent)
said “No” that is there was no area they were afraid of. In middle residential areas of
Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga areas, the “yes” percentage was increasingly
substantially to 22 out of 40 (55 percent) and to 40 out of 50 (80 percent) in high density
areas of Chaisa and Chipata compounds. In short a total of 75 members of the community
indicated they were afraid as compared to only 55 members of the community who
indicated they were not afraid to walk alone in the night in their community.
However, not surprising the “yes” answer was also selected by most police officers
who operate in police posts especially in high and middle density areas of Lusaka. For
instance, 70 (70 percent) police offers indicated that there are so many areas that even
police officers themselves are scared to patrol in the night if they happen to be two (2)
unless in the company of at least more than four (4) neighborhood watch personnel. They
also informed the study that even when at police posts they are always alert for fear of
being attacked by criminals who are after firearms, hence the requirement for more than
two (2) officers in the night in addition to the beef up from the neighborhood watch
personnel. This view was not held by counter parts from woodlands and kabulonga areas
it was not the case.

Table 4.13: Victim’s Most Important Reasons for Not Reporting Cases to the Police

Total Felt it was a Police could Did not want Too Fear of
number of private not be to waste confused or reprisal from
those who matter and effective time because did not the police
did not did not want of police know how to
report to the to harm the inaction report
police offender
29 4 14 6 3 2

On the reasons given by the 29 (22 percent) respondents who were victims of crime did
indicate in table 4.13 that did not report to the police because they felt it was share waste
of time and never had trust and confidence in the police service because even if they
reported nothing happens. They further indicated that police officers always ask the
victim of crime to provide logistics in terms of transport money or complain about lack of
manpower; hence most reports are not followed up especially from the poor members of
the community. But when you offer them something especially money then they will visit
the scene and will just end there no further investigations are carried on. Furthermore,
most police officers indicated that some of the reasons why some members of public
were discouraged to report crimes to the police were because of bad behavior of some
officers in the way they handled complaints from members of the public. Lack of interest
and concern by some officers to professionally deal with a crime problem received. They
also said lack of respect and the use of bad language by some officers towards members
of the public.
Table 4.14: The Level of Security Concern from Members of the Community

Response Very Safe Pretty Unsafe

Safe Safe
The level of security with Community 12 41 38 39
Policing Programmes in place

The study asked: Compared to the time before community policing (police posts and
neighbourhood watch schemes) was introduced in their communities some 15 years ago,
how do they feel in the streets of their community today with community policing in
place? The responses varied depending on which community one came from. For
instance in low density areas 8 (20 percent) said they felt very safe, 20 (50 percent) said
they felt safe and 6 (15) percent said they felt pretty safe in their communities while also
6 (15 percent) said they felt unsafe. On the contrary in middle densely populated areas of
Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga and high densely populated areas of Chaisa and Chipata
compound those who felt very safe and safe were few compared to those who felt pretty
safe, and unsafe as the number was increasing. For example, 3 (7.5 percent) and 14 (35
percent) in Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga said they felt very safe and safe in their
communities respectively as compared to 11 (27 percent), 12(30 percent) in Emmasdale
and Nyumba Yanga who said they felt pretty safe and unsafe in their communities
respectively. Further in Chaisa and Chipata compounds only 1 (2 percent) and 7 (14
percent) said they felt very safe and safe in their communities as compared to 21 (42
percent), and 21 (42 percent) said they felt pretty safe and unsafe in their communities
respectively.
The response from various respondents from the three different communities clearly
shows that the majority members of the community especially in low density areas of
Kabulonga and Woodlands over 70 percent felt Safe in their neighborhood at night.
While in residential areas of Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga over 55 percent felt pretty
safe and unsafe in their communities. Furthermore, in Chipata and Chaisa compound the
number of those who felt pretty safe and unsafe was even more for instance, over 80
percent felt “pretty safe” or “ unsafe” in their neighborhoods at night leaving only about
20 per cent who said they felt very safe or safe in their communities.
The study may then conclude that the level of safety or security concern was different
from one community to the other depending where one comes from whether high, middle
or low density residential area. For instance, in low density populated areas more
respondent said they felt very safe compared to high density populated areas where the
majority felt unsafe.

Table 4.15: The Level of Security Concern from Police Officers

Response Very Safe Pretty Unsafe

Safe Safe
The level of security with Community 29 41 14 16
Policing Programmes in place
However, the response from police officers on how they described the level of safety or
security in the communities they operated it was contrary to the views of the host
communities. About 70 percent police officers indicated that the areas they operated from
are safe for instance, in table 4.15, 29 (29 percent) indicated very safe and 41 (41 percent)
indicated safe in terms of security in the communities they operated from. While 14 (14
percent) said pretty safe, and 16 (16 percent) said unsafe. The 16 percent police officers
who indicated unsafe came from officers who operated from high densely populated
areas of Chaisa and Chipata compound that are associated with high crime rates.
Therefore, the study observation to police officers who said “very safe” or “safe” in
support of the areas they operated from could be that they did not want to tell the truth
because they never wanted to be regarded as failures or to be blamed that they are not
doing enough to police and protect the communities.
After reviewing the data collected from the study on public attitude towards crime, the
analysis concluded that the crimes which members of the public feared most were crimes
which might endanger their personal safety and property, especially attack by a
“stranger”. For instance, most members of the community indicated that they fear
robberies, aggravated robberies, and burglary and theft while a few indicated thefts and
assaults. However all the 48 (36 percent) female respondents indicated that they feared
most crimes against women like assaults, murder, rape and defilements which usually
happen on a female who is under the age of 18 years. Hence because of fear of violent
crimes, the majority of the respondents said they had changed their habits to protect
themselves.
These findings were also supported by the police officers though they were
categorized according to communities. For instance, the study observed that in low
densely populated areas of Woodlands and Kabulonga most people indicated that they
feared aggravated robberies and robberies than any other crimes as they are prone in
these areas. While in middle densely populated areas of Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga
the most feared crimes are aggravated robberies, robberies, and burglary and thefts and
they said these were actually the common crimes in these communities. In the final count
most of police officers who operate in highly densely populated areas of Chaisa and
Chipata compound indicated that people in these communities feared crimes like burglary
and theft, house breaking and theft, rape, defilements, assaults and robberies. Actually all
the Criminal Investigation Officers (CIOs), the study interviewed confirmed that actually
these are the most common reported crimes in the shanty compounds of Lusaka.

Police Ability to Deal with Crime

Table 4.16: Responses on Public Trust on Police Ability to Deal with Crime

RESPONDENTS COMMUITY POLICE OFFICERS

Yes % No % Yes % No %
Response
Public trust on police ability to deal 50 38% 80 62% 58 58% 42 42%
with crime
Figure 4.13: Summary of some Responses on the Public Trust on the Police Ability

Number of Hundreds 0.9

Respondents 0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5 Public YES
0.4 Public NO
0.3 Police YES
0.2
Police NO
0.1
0
Community trusting police Community trusting police
abilities to deal with crime abilities to deal with crime

On the community trusting the police ability to deal with their crime problem, it was
noted in the study that the majority did not trust the police ability to deal with their crime
problem effectively. For example, from the responses in figure 4.13, and table 4.16, 50
(38 percent) respondents said “Yes” to police ability to deal with their crime problem. On
the contrary, 80 (62%) said “No” to police ability to deal with their crime problem. On
the police side 58 (58%) per said “Yes” members of the community had trust in the
police to deal with their crime problem effectively. While on the other hand 42 (42%)
police officers said “No” meaning that members of the public had no trust in the police to
deal with their crime problem respectively. It may be then concluded that there are more
members of the public who do not believe that the police have the ability to deal with
crime problem than the police who believe that the public still has trust in police ability to
deal with their crime problems.

Table 4.17: Responses on Impact of Community policing on Police Performance and

Assistance to crime

Response Excellent % Very % Good % Fair % Poor %

good
Police 11 8 24 18 37 28 41 32 17 13
Performance
Police 9 7 13 10 21 16 23 18 64 50
Assistance
Figure 4.14: Responses on police performance and assistance on crime

0.7

0.6

0.5
Number of Hundreds
Respondents

0.4 Excellent
Very Good
Good
0.3
Fair
Poor
0.2

0.1

0
Rate of police performance today Quality of assistance by Police

In spite of the prevailing feeling of the inefficacy of the police and the current policing
system in crime control and prevention in place, the local police stations and police posts
in table 4.17 and figure 4.14, are rated favorably in terms of performance by a great
majority in the study. The study showed that citizens’ evaluation on the local community
police performance is favorable to the police. The study reported that 11 (8%) said the
local police performance was excellent, 24(18% indicated very good, 37(28%) indicated
good, while 41 (32 percent) said fair”, and 17 (13 percent) said poor.
On the contrary, the study found that though the police may be rated favorably on
performance but are rated negatively on the way they responded to calls for assistance
whenever the public had a crime problem which required immediate response and
assistance from the police. For example in figure 4.14 and table 4.17, 9 respondents from
the community said their community police was excellent, 13(10%) indicated their
community police was very good, 21(16%) indicated their police community was good
and 23(18%) indicated their community police was fair in terms of assistance. On the
contrary 64 (50%) respondents from the community indicated their community police
was poor in terms of assistance whenever they had a crime problem. From the above
assessment it is clearly indicative that in terms of performance (processing the cases to
court) the police have really been appreciated by the majority members of the public.
However, it was the opposite in terms of assistance when the police are called upon to
assist in case of crime being committed or sense of urgency or when quick response is
needed by the victim of crime. In this area the police response was not very much
appreciated by the majority of the community.
Further the citizens’ evaluation of the police assistance when called by the community
was assessed in relation to 3 selected communities of the city of low, middle and high
densely populated residential areas. The study indicates that the responses were different
depending on which community one came from. The police response to calls for
assistance was considered prompt (less than 10 minutes) or in less than 1 (one) hour in
the two type of residential areas of low and middle density populated areas. On the
contrary, most respondents from high densely populated areas of Chaisa and Chipata
compounds indicated that the police came after 2 (two) and beyond or never came to
assist the community. However, the reason behind this was that in Woodlands,
Kabulonga, Emmasdale and Nyumba Yanga the houses are easily accessible and with
good roads, they have the resources in terms of transport and money for talk time for easy
communication as compared to their counterparts in high density areas of Chaisa and
Chipata compound where there are no proper roads, house numbers and also lack the
capacity in terms of resources. Hence, mostly the assistance was not favorable as the
police response and assistance in most cases was not there as the police never came to
their aid at the right time when needed.
Furthermore, on the quality of assistance from the police again, in figure 12, 66 (50
percent) rated the police excellent, very good or good and fair whenever they took a
complaint to the police. While on the other hand only 37 (28 percent) rated the police
assistance as satisfactory and only 29 (22 percent) rated the police assistance as
unsatisfactory whenever they took a case or complaint to the police station or police post.
It may then be concluded by the study, that the police performance is appreciated and
rated favorably in all the three communities of high, middle and low densely populated
areas of Lusaka. On the other hand, however, the study findings are different in the way
the three types of communities rate police assistance and response to crime problem. In
middle and low densely populated areas they rate the police favorably in terms of
response and assistance to crime problem. On the contrary the communities in high
densely populated areas, the police are rated negatively in terms of response and
assistance to crime emergencies.

The Impact of Community policing on the Police-Community Relationship

Table 4.18: Number of Number of Responses from the Members of the Community

Response Excellent % Very % Good % Fair % Poor %

good
Before Nil 0 7 5 13 10 31 24 79 61
Community
Policing
After 8 6 17 13 44 34 41 31 20 15
Community
Policing
Figure 4.15: Number of Responses from the Members of Public

0.7

0.6
Number of Hundreds

0.5
Respondents

0.4 Excellent
Very good
0.3 Good
Fair
0.2 Poor

0.1

0
Relationship before Relationship after Community
Community Policing Policing

Table 4 .19: Response from Police Officers

Response Excellent % Very % Good % Fair % Poor %

good
Relationship Nil 0 Nil 0 12 12 25 25 63 63
before
Community
Policing
Relationship after 6 6 11 11 46 12 29 29 8 8
Community
Policing

As regards to how the relationship was between the police and public before community
policing was adopted by the Zambia police service in 1995. Only a few indicated that the
relationship was sound while the majority indicated it was not sound. For instance in
table1.19, out of 130 respondents from the community, zero respondents indicated that
the relationship was excellent, 7(5 percent) respondents said the relationship was very
good, 13(10 percent) respondents said the relationship was good and 31 (24 percent)
respondents said the relationship at that time between the police and the public was fair
while to the contrary 79 (61 percent) respondents indicated that the relationship was poor.
This view that the relationship was bad between the police and the public was
acknowledged by most police officers who stated that the relationship between the police
and members of the community was poor. Further in table 4.19, 63 (63 percent) police
officers indicated that the relationship was poor, 25 (25 percent) said the ralationship was
fair and about 12 (12 percent) indicated that the relationship between the police and the
members of the community was good while no one indicated that it was either excellent
or very good.
Regarding the relationship between the police and the public, the study results are
actually the opposite from what transpired before and what has transpired after the
introduction of community policing. The results are showing great improvements in
relationship between the police and the public after implementation of community
policing in the last 15 years than before. For instance from 130 members of the
community, 8 (6 percent) said the relationship is excellent, 17 (13 percent) is very good,
44 (34 percent) said is good and 41 (31 percent) said it is fair while only 20 (15 percent)
said it is poor. Further this was also supported by the police officers where only 8 (8
percent) said that the relationship is poor. While the rest said the relationship between the
police and the public is either excellent or very good and good or fair.
Therefore, one of the biggest impacts of the reform process since Community Policing
Strategy was adopted by the Zambia Police has been in the change of relationship
between the public and the police. Until relatively recently the police were still regarded
with suspicion and fear. Despite the problems that still exist in the public mind as regards
corruption, the slowness to respond to victims call and the use of excessive violence
against opposition, there is not the suspicion and fear of the police that there once was.
Today the almost universal member of the public response in Zambia is that the police
were now friendly, approachable and showed respect to all citizens. Police may not
always be close at hand to many citizens, but generally people would not hesitate to call
upon them if there was something that needed their assistance. This is a remarkable turn
around, the more so given that across much Africa the police are often held in contempt
and fear. True there are those who say it is better not to report a crime than go to the
police station, but many respondents in the study observed that when it was a police
force, many people were afraid of the police but with the change to a police service the
public now feel they have a role to play as partners with the police in fight against crime.

Community Policing and Human Rights Observance

The observance of human rights plays a critical role in all law enforcement agencies
especially the police. However, the results obtained from the study from both the police
and the public, clearly indicate that before community policing was introduced in 1995
by the Zambia police, the human rights records were very bad in the way the police
handled suspects, criminals and the community at large.
Table 4.20: Number of Responses from Members of the Public

Response Very Much Observed Partially Not

Observed Observed Observed
Observance of human rights before Nil 21 49 60
Community Policing
Observance of human rights after 7 40 59 24
Community Policing

Figure 4.16: Bar Chart Showing Number of Responses from the Community

0.7
Very Much
0.6 Observed

0.5 Observed
Number of Hundreds Respondents

0.4
Partially Observed
0.3

0.2 Not Observed

0.1

0
BEFORE AFTER

Table 4.21: Number of Responses from Police Officers

Response Very Much Observed Partially Not

Observed Observed Observed
Observance of human rights before 3 24 33 40
Community Policing
Observance of human rights after 38 51 9 2
Community Policing

After the implementation of community policing in 1995, there has been some
improvement in human rights by the Zambia police service. For instance, as indicated by
respondents from the community in table 4.20 and figure 14, 21(16 percent) members of
the community said human rights were observed, 49 (37 percent) said human rights were
partially observed and 60 (46 percent) said human rights were not observed while no one
indicated human rights were much observed. With regards to police officers, the
responses were almost in the same rage as those of the community. For example, in table
4.21, 40 (40 percent) of police officers indicted that before community policing human
rights were not observed by Zambia police, 33 (33 percent) said human rights were
partially observed and 24 (24 percent) said human rights were observed while only 3 (3
percent) indicated that human rights were very much observed by the Zambia police
force. It should be noted that one of the major aims of community policing was to reduce
human rights abuses by half or 50 percent by the year 2000 in the Zambia police.
However, the results on the human rights observance with community policing in
place in comparison with what transpired before the community policing was introduced
is that police observance on human rights has improved. The responses from the
members of the community suggest that the police have made some positive steps in the
sense that, only 24 (18 percent) indicated that the police today did not observe or respect
human rights on the suspects and the community at large. While the rest for instance, 59
(45 percent) said partially observed, 40 (31 percent) said observed and 8 (6 percent) said
that human rights today are much observed by the police compared to the time before
community policing was introduced. In support of this, the responses from the police
officers were overwhelming in that 38 (38 percent) said today human rights were much
observed, 51 (51 percent) said today human rights were observed and on other hand only
9 (9 percent) and 2 (2 percent) police officers indicated that today human rights were
partially observed or completely not observed by police officers. Therefore, there are
more members of the public and police officers who believe that today the police respect
and observe human rights of the suspects, criminals and the public at large as compared
to the period before community policing was introduced.

Impact of Community Policing Strategy on Crime Reduction

Table 4.22: Number of Responses

RESPONDENTS COMMUITY POLICE OFFICERS

Yes % No % Yes % No %
Response
Effectiveness of community policing 57 44 73 56 63 63% 37 37%
strategy in reducing crime
Figure 4 .18: Effectiveness of Community Policing on Crime Reduction

Number of Hundreds Respondents

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5 Public Yes
0.4
Public No
0.3
Police Yes
0.2
0.1 Public No
0
Effectiveness of community policingEffectiveness of community policing
strategy in reducing crime strategy in reducing crime

As indicated in the first chapter no evaluation or research was done by the Zambia police
to assist in assessing whether community policing strategy achieved its goal to reduce
crime by half in the year 2000 and beyond. Despite some of achievements for example, in
observance of human rights, improvement in relationship between the police and the
public and other achievements to be explained in the next chapter, most respondents both
the public and police feel it has not been very effective in crime reduction. For instance,
in table 4:22 and figure 4.18, shows that 57 (44 percent) members of the public indicated
that community policing is effective in contrast to 73 (56 percent) who said or indicated
that it was not effective in reducing crime rates because crime is still sky rocketing. On
the responses from the police officers it was noted that more than 63 (63 percent)
indicated that it is effective as compared to 37 (37 percent) who said that it is not
effective. There could be a reason why most police officers indicated that community
policing is effective, it could be that they did not want to be associated with failure as
they are directly involved.
The picture of crime in these communities that it is threatening the wealthier residents
is far from the reality. In fact the poor of these communities are more victimized than the
perpetrators of crimes. As alluded to earlier, the study revealed that people who live in
these communities are the most likely to be victimized by both property and violent crime
as compared to those from middle and low densely populated areas of Lusaka. But while
the poor in these communities are more exposed to crime in areas in which they live, they
are far less able to afford protection from physical security measures such as walls,
burglar proofing and electronic alarms. Therefore, the fear of crime, high victimization
rates and rising crime rates in these poor communities are as much a reflection of their
inability to defend themselves against crime. This also explains why there are many
police posts and neighborhood watch schemes in these communities compared to the
middle and low densely populated areas. These have come about because of community
policing strategy that was adopted during the reformation of the Zambia police in 1995
which encourages community participation in the fight and prevention of crime. In these
communities there is greater participation in crime prevention through such schemes as
this is the only alternative to guarantee them safety.
Further, the study findings are highly revealing in that the local police performance
generally pleases the citizens with regard to violent crimes against women and children
especially the girl child through the Victim Support Unit (VSU), but the local citizens are
not satisfied with the police service in other criminal matters. The citizens experience,
based on evaluation of the community policing as ineffective in criminal matters in
Lusaka Urban community, helps to explain why public views the law enforcement
system of community policing as generally ineffective in reduction and control of crime.

Impact of Community policing on the Gender Composition of the Police Service

The political, social and economical changes of the 1990s challenged the Zambians to
reaffirm their commitment to equality before the law. The political democratic changes of
1991 have had a major impact on the composition of the Zambia police service, hence
during reformation of the Zambia police and to comply with the gender policy of 30
percent representation of women in holding key positions in all government departments,
police service had to make an effort to attract female applicants. However, this was met
with some resistance in the police circles. Serious obstacles and stereotypes had to be
overcome: that women were physically weak, irrational, and illogical; that they lacked
the toughness needed to deal with work on the streets. Some argued that the association
of female and male officers would cause complications in both job and family life.
By 1994, according to the statistics given by a police public relations office, the
number of policewomen was still low- under 4 percent. By the year 2000 that proportion
had more than doubled, to 10 percent. On personnel practices, the study found that
eligibility criteria and mechanisms used to recruit, screen, and select candidates have
changed dramatically, enlarging the pool of eligible women. Currently in the Zambia
police more than 30 percent female recruits are recruited during recruitment time.
Despite the advances that women have made in policing in the Zambia police service,
they are still not fully accepted by their male colleagues or the public. Most of the
resistance stems from the belief that the physical strength of women does not allow them
to perform well in violent situations. As a result in responding to these concerns, police
continue to assign women to clerical duties or to specific types of problems, such as
domestic disputes and this is happening in the Zambia police as most women have been
deployed in the Community Services Division especially the Victim Support Unit. The
study demonstrated, however, that these fears are “unfounded” because female police
officers make almost as many arrests as male officers, their overall work performance has
been rated extremely satisfactory by superiors, their level of strength is well within the
acceptable range for professional performance, and they may be more pleasant and
respectful with the public than their male counterparts.
Figure 4.19: Impact of Community Policing on Gender composition of the Zambia
Police Service

As regards the way police women perceive themselves, it appears that they enter the
police service self-confident and a bit idealistic but gradually become disillusioned by
others’ beliefs that they are flirtatious and ineffective. In sum, policewomen have indeed
made their mark on the police service, but it may be some time before their male
colleagues accept them as equal partners. However, the major contributing factor for the
attraction of female police officers is because the police force has changed from that of
being brutal to that of being friendly.
.
4.4 THE CHALLENGES OF COMMUNITY POLICING

The major challenge to community policing in Zambia is the declining social value of
society itself. Despite efforts made by the Zambia police service to reform the police in
1995 at national, divisional, district, station and post levels, the situation has indeed
worsened. It has been observed that community policing strategy in Zambia has not been
implemented in full because the police service has been inflicted by problems of political
interference, nepotism, corruption, inefficiency, poor conditions of service, lack of
coordination between the police and the community, lack of resources, poor management
and institutional capacity building. In addition values such as integrity, honesty,
dependability, helpfulness, impartiality, courteousness, and fairness are gradually
disappearing from the police service. Unfortunately, in most Zambian communities, there
is no system for reinforcing these values. These weaknesses have stifled the process of
policing crime in the Zambian communities.
 It is therefore, understood that the endurance and viability of the democratic exercise
in Zambia in the long term will be determined by the effectiveness, fairness and public
accountability of its police service. However, in reality, the police service is one of the
weakest links in the governance process. For instance, 99 percent of the targeted
respondents stated that its institutional, technical, and administrative capacities are
inadequate to support members of the community to perform their role in preventing
crime effectively. In addition, police officers themselves do not have the necessary
education, skills, information and knowledge in community policing to perform their
functions effectively and this trickles down to the members of the community. Physical
infrastructure, information and communication technology, as well as other facilities like
transport, fuel, are also lacking or inadequate.
The policing of crime in Zambia cannot be viewed adequately without considering the
current position of the Zambia Police Service. There has long been a crisis of confidence,
trust and honest on the part of the public as to the ability of the police service to deal
effectively with crime. By some, the police are viewed with suspicion; corruption,
unprofessional and ineffective, while others associate police officers with dishonest,
criminality, hostility and view them with contempt. This has not been helped by public
criticism of the police service from the public and various media even by the government
and police command. There is no doubt to others, especially people from high density
residential areas that the performance and assistance being rendered by the police has
been described to be undesirable, especially with sky-rocketing crime rates for offences
against persons and property remaining unexplained.

There are several factors that have contributed to the derailment of the successful
implementation of community policing by the Zambia Police Service. The first, and
probably the most serious problem stems from the fact that there is erosion of the rule of
law in the Zambia police service. As a result of this, members of the public have been
very critical of the Zambia police service. Yet even the improvement in the public
perception is relative, members of the public still complain about the slowness of the
police to respond to crime problems; and there were persistent claims by the majority of
those interviewed of bribe seeking. Deaths still occur in police custody, some due to
torture and some suspected criminals are still shot and killed while being pursued.
However, it is not always clear that any action has been taken against those concerned.
There has been a serious erosion of the rule of law in Zambia by the Zambia police
because policing is not always conducted according to the rule of law. A typical example
is that equality before the law has been seriously eroded as a result of the behavior of
state institutions, particularly the police service that lacks professionalism. Cadres of the
ruling MMD, as well as its top officials have committed numerous criminal offences,
sometimes in the presence of the police but, the police have taken no action against them.
On the other hand the police are quick to arrest opposition leaders and supporters at the
slightest opportunity, even when there are no reasonable causes. Further, there has been
consistent abuse of the Public Order Act by police, which deny the opposition political
parties and non-governmental organisations permission to hold public meetings and
demonstrations but at the same time allow MMD supporters to have meetings and
demonstrations even in flagrant disregard of the provisions of the Act (Chanda, 1999).
 The criticism against The Zambia police by members of the public have continued.
For example, in Zambia the police are repeatedly charged with political partisanship in
the increasingly heated political atmosphere of emerging multi-partyism. This can be
evidenced when the police allowed the MMD cadres to perpetuate violence in
Mufumbwe during the parliamentary by-elections. The evidence suggests a concerted
effort campaign on the use of the police by the MMD against the political opposition
parties because the Inspector General of Police (IG) was on record blaming the
opposition UPND in particular without renouncing the MMD who were the perpetrators
of violence in Mufumbwe.
This meant that the language of a professional officer was highly compromised and
sounded like that of a political cadre. Though the political policing may not affect
directly the majority of the population, it is still prevalent and violent. The opposition
leaders have suffered physical abuse, including caning, severe beating, and inflicting pain
on their bodies. Parallel with this is the use of the police to repress the opposition press,
with journalists assaulted by MMD cadres and arrested by the police for trapped up
charges like contempt of court and defaming the president (based on their criticism of
President Banda (The Post 4TH MAY 2010). Therefore, the IG and the high command
should have realized that a compromised police service is a danger to society. It is then
evident that for all the improvements in everyday policing this is not a democratic police
service.
The second problem pertaining to the implementation of community policing strategy
is associated with the inadequate resources. In this respect one may be tempted to argue
that in areas where the community services officers are trying hard to put up programmes
that involved the community in policing their area, they are faced with a lot of challenges
in terms of facilities such as transport, stationary and office equipment. Since most
officers are not trained in community policing activities, availability of transport would
have meant that the few that have the technical know-how in community policing would
hold seminars, meetings and station lectures to officers and community members.
The National and Divisional CSD Coordinators are also suppose to attend Annual
General Meetings of NWAs but are not able to due to lack of transport and financial
support from the police leadership. A key informant, who is also a coordinator at Lusaka
Divisional Headquarters, confessed that while other departments like the Criminal
Investigations and Police Intelligence Departments are funded monthly for their
operations, CSD is not given any funding. They do not even have a single vehicle for
them to use as operational or a pool vehicle. The only vehicle they can use is the one that
was donated to VSU by the Danish government which is very busy because of rising
gender based crimes. This has frustrated the efforts of the CSD officers. Therefore,
currently very little is being done in terms of sensitizing both the police officers and the
public.
Further, the study observed that almost all police posts and a good number of stations
rely on the community for stationary, transport and finances for police operations. The
police started to abuse the concept of greater community participation by making many
demands from the community for things which are not directly related to police duties
such as money for mealy meal, cooking oil, rentals, medical fees etc, in short receiving
support even for personal problems that officers may have. In fact, many officers
interviewed suggested that community policing, for it to thrive, must be complemented
financially and materially by the community they are serving. This has had a negative
impact in police operations because it has led to corruption and abuse of authority in the
police service. For instance, one key informant noted that the sponsors of their formation
are given a preferential status. They get priority treatment and the police are forced to
bend the rules when either the sponsor himself/ herself or close friends find themselves in
conflict with the law. People who know are prone to getting in conflict with the criminal
law are the biggest sponsors. In basic terms, this is corrupting the police so that they
abuse their authority. So to fight such vices the police are challenged to provide resources
to all police stations and posts.
Furthermore, there is a serious shortage of police stations in Lusaka Urban. For
instance, whilst the population of Lusaka has increased, by over 300 per cent since 1964,
no new major police stations have been built. Consequently, this has placed an enormous
strain on existing stations. Stations which were built and established to cater for small
areas prior to independence, now cater for areas twenty or more times larger than they
were designed to cover. Instead, the police service has introduced the system of Police
Post (holding cells) with the help of the community. However, most of these police posts
are not well refurbished as they are in the form of containers, old community halls and
unfinished buildings, no proper cells and toilets and sometimes no piped water and are
not gazetted. Also, officers in these police posts are usually overworked due lack of relief
manpower as there are only two shifts. The result is that most of the new residential
areas, high, middle and low density, for instance Chalala area in woodlands have no
permanent police presence.
Transport also remains a major hindrance in policing crime in the Zambian
communities. For instance, all police stations are not operating on the authorized
allocation scale that was used in 1965. Ndulo (1994), states that prior to 1965, each
police station was allocated three vehicles for three shifts and one vehicle for general
administration. However, today most police stations have just one vehicle (only a few
with two) which is used by all three shifts for twenty four hours and general
administration. Not surprising, the vehicles are constantly breaking down because of
being overused as they are changed from one driver to another without servicing. Both
members of community and police interviewed have stressed, as an added problem to
motor vehicles that the choice of police vehicles is often made unilaterally by the IG and
this has resulted in the acquisition of vehicles which are unsuited for local conditions. For
example, the police acquired Nissans and RAV 4 vehicles in 2006 and 2007 respectively.
These are totally not suitable and ill-equipped to handle the most Zambian conditions,
hence very few are properly serviceable. Attempts to purchase spare parts for these
vehicles have been difficult due lack of funding hence stations have to buy and do the
repairs on their own. Further, both senior and junior police officers also reported severe
lack of fuel, lack of uniforms especially shoes and lack of accommodation as the biggest
problems. This acute lack of transport has resulted in the police service virtually grinding
to a halt.
Another hindrance is lack of finances by most NWAs. Information gathered from the
study is that most NWAs, especially those from high density areas, cannot afford the fees
to pay for registration at the Office of the Registrar of Societies. Therefore, the majorities
of NWAs in Lusaka urban have remained unregistered and so cannot be recognized
legally. It was also noted that people who are well to do and the business community do
not take keen interest in joining the NWAs hence unable to be sustained.
The third problem seems to result from alleged corruption and abuse of authority.
McCormack (1997:419) defines corruption, on the part of a public official, as behavior
that deviates from the normal duties of a public role because of pecuniary or status gains.
Corruption is the abuse of public roles and resources for private benefit or the misuse of
office for private ends. There are many types of corruption: - bribery; theft and
embezzlement of public funds; intentional loss of or damage to public property or
interest; abuse of insider information and many others. Corruption is a pervasive
phenomenon. It increases the cost of public services delivered to the citizens and it is
usually ‘behind the screen’ and not easily detected, particularly petty corruption among
lower cadres of the police service, as well as “grand” corruption at top management
levels.
With reforms in place in the Zambia police in this democratic era the progressive
thought is that the civil service system would eliminate corruption and incompetence
among the police. Yet after 15 years of reforms in place, police corruption still persists.
The term “corruption” covers a wide range of conduct patterns. For example, many
people in Zambia distinguished-in typical police jargon- between “meat eaters,” who
solicit bribes or actually cooperate with criminals for personal gain, and “grass eaters”
who accept payoffs for rendering police services or for looking the other way when
action is called for. Further the study has subsequently revealed and provided additional
classifications and descriptions of police misconduct, including soliciting and accepting
bribes, dereliction of duty, and street crime offenses such as larceny, embezzlement, and
coercion.
Complaints are common about police officers engaged in acts of corruption such as
demanding bribes at check points, falsely charging motorists with violations and
impounding vehicles to extort money. Transparent International Zambia claim that the
police officers demanded money from accused persons for their charges to be dropped
and also for them to be released on police bond. The practice of charging complainants
fees for stationary such as medical forms, affidavits, and other papers before obtaining
statements from them has also continued. More seriously, police are said to be in
collusion with criminals and accept bribes from suspects in exchange for dropping
charges.
Despite the effort of the Zambia police service in-conjunction with Anti- Corruption
Commission putting in place Code of Ethics and the putting in place of the Police
Standards and Professional Unit in 2007, corruption has continued. According to
Transparence International Zambia, corruption may even be more serious now than it was
before the reformation of the police. Even police chiefs and presidents bemoan police
corruption. For example, in Zambia, according to (The Times of Zambia, July 24, 2003),
Assistant Commissioner of Police and the then Copperbelt Deputy Police Chief, Grace
Chipalila, noted there were many criminal element within the ranks; and further from
President Mwanawasa also expressed disappointment at the police service that had failed
and needed serious cleansing.
The police service in Zambia mainly relies on internal control to police itself. If
internal control is to be effective, there is need for the law enforcement professionals to
change their thinking about self policing. For example, police whistle blowers are
regarded with derision. Such attitude needs to be replaced by intolerance toward those
who abuse the public trust and the power of the shield by engaging in abuses, corruption,
and other forms of criminality. The revelation of the study from Key Informants, Officers
in-Charge police stations and members of the public at large indicate, however, that more
police officers are unwilling to report misconduct by other officers. This raises the
question of whether there is anything special or different about the personality of police
officers and the culture in which they function that sets them apart from the rest of the
population.
Fourthly, inadequate of manpower, is another serious challenge that has affected
effective performance of the Zambia police in community policing. The Zambia police
service objectives, according to Daka (2003), are like the objectives of the police service
of every country which are to: “preserve life, protect property, prevent the commission of
crime, detect offenders and keep the peace among citizens”. No doubt, however, that the
police are overstretched. According to the HIV and AIDS/STI/TB Workplace Policy of
the Zambia Police Service, currently there about 15,000 personnel in the Zambia police
against the population of over 12 million people, well below their goal of 27,000 in 2015
to provide 1 police officer per 600 citizens. Therefore, Zambia Police Service can only
provide an operation police civilian ratio of about 1 per (800) eight hundred citizens. This
is inadequate to provide the crime prevention and crime investigation service that the
public want. The crisis of confidence continues, swelled by a continuing shortage of well-
trained and able officers especially at the levels from Constables to Chief Inspectors and
at some senior ranks.
Additional factors are poor conditions of service and restrictions on recruitment due to
lack of resources that have led to police strength being continuously below the required
establishment compared to the increase in population and crime. This is because it is a
government decision as to how many officers can be recruited in a particular year. Thus
police needs may not be satisfied by the number of recruits made available. For example
in the history of Zambia Police, it was only in 1969, 1972 and 1976 that police strength
was up to establishment. The number of officers rose from 5880 in 1964 to 18,884 in
1986- a small increase compared to the population and crime increases (Times of
Zambia, 12 February 1988). It can be noted that this strength at that time was inadequate
and yet today the strength is even lesser than the manpower at that time. Therefore, there
is both administrative and operational manpower problem. Crime which could easily be
contained has accelerated due to lack of intensive foot and general patrols. The little
manpower which is available is engaged in guarding vital installations, banks, filling
stations, and VIPs, hence only a few are left to patrol and protect the general public. The
resultant lack of man power has today undoubtedly seriously affected police operations
and its effectiveness and it is likely to do so for some time.
Lack of political will is another problem affecting effective performance of
community policing by the police. On the issue of the legal basis on community policing,
in particular the involvement of the community in crime prevention, it is very inadequate.
However, information from respondents, especially the key informants, is that there is
lack of political will on the part of the government to allow the police to have the full
complement of laws that will allow it partner with the community fully as required by the
“strategy” of community policing. It is expected though that as the country’s political
system matures, so will the policing policy and strategies. The community may then be
expected to actively get involved in policing their areas as well as the running of their
local police. The fact that the national policing strategy through community policing is
not backed by law, means that whoever heads the police will be able to change the
strategy to suit his or her individual beliefs. This has been a major challenge in the police
service that has caused the Zambia Police Reforms to have very little progress if any at
all. The frequent changing of Inspector Generals in the past fifteen years has seen the
police trying and testing various types of policing strategies over the years some of which
are abandoned immediately he is replaced by another Inspector General of Police.
Currently in Zambia, it is evident that the importance of police reforms through
community policing mainly depends on the head of the institution at that particular time.
For instance, the person that first started the police reforms, former IG, Mr. Francis
Ndhlovu, was very passionate about reforming the police by introducing CP in Zambia in
1995. Therefore, under his reign CP was very active. However, after him in 2000, the IGs
that followed did not and still do not have as much passion about reforming the Zambia
police through CP as he did. As a result, the importance of community policing and its
community services units have faded in the police service as it has been the least of the
issues for the police for almost ten years now. Further, just as community policing is not
seen as a priority to police management, it is also not a priority to the government. The
government has never been active in the reform programme for the police and how
citizens are policed has never been an issue in Zambia and so government has never
shown much interest by not putting any policy document on community policing. Hence
the need to put in place a legal framework through a policy document on community
policing for who ever is the IG to continue the policy without any hesitation.
Furthermore, inadequate training is another problem pertaining to the implementation
of community policing in Zambia. As discussed earlier, almost all NWA members are not
trained in law enforcement and there use in patrols is beset with a lot of problems ranging
from abuse of Human Rights to simply being unreliable since they cannot be compelled
to work as it is voluntary and so they work when they want. As explained by one senior
police officer, “in as much as citizens’ patrols prevent crime, police officers can do a
much better job, but do not have sufficient numbers of officers to do the patrols. Most
members of the public are ignorant about criminal law and law enforcement and as a
result, the police through the office of the officer in charge receive a lot of complaints
from members of the community who have been unfairly treated or abused by NWA
members”. The complaints usually come when members of the NWAs conduct patrols
and investigations without the involvement of or being accompanied by police officers.
For example, a chairman of neighborhood watch association explained that “most
NWA members (especially those in the poor high density areas like Chaisa and Chipata
compounds or shanty compounds) work in the NWA almost as a full-time job because
they are unemployed. As a result, they usually find ways and means of earning a living
through NWA activities, mostly by illegal means”. The most common way they earn a
living is through extorting from suspects by threatening, torturing and even stealing from
suspect’s things like cell phones and even exhibits found at the police station or post.
Further, they also in many cases make complainants pay them before following a report
on a reported complaint. Some NWA members also encourage monetary settlement of
criminal cases, they usually act as reconciliators. They negotiate with the complainant to
accept money from the accused. This is usually done in order for them to gain something,
because if the case went to court, they would not benefit financially. In most cases, these
NWA members work in collaboration with police officers to extort money from both the
complainant and the accused.
Lack of decentralization of police administration is also another problem affecting
effective performance of community policing. According to the 1994 situation analysis
done by the Zambia Police Reform workshop, it was established that decision making in
the Zambia police is centralized at police headquarters especially through the Office of
Inspector General of Police. An Officer in Charge of a police station could not decide
independently to implement policing strategies or involve the local citizens in policing
without the approval of the Office of the Commanding Officer or Inspector General of
Police. This is a reflection of the whole governing system of centralization where power
is vested at the center. As it is known that Zambia operates as a unitary system, therefore,
even if it is divided into nine provinces, the provincial leadership has no independent
authority to govern. This is the same way the Zambia police operate in policing its
citizens. The Zambia police service is divided into nine divisions and six special support
groups but all these report to the Inspector General of Police where they derive
instructions. In this system of policing, no division, district, station or police post can
decide to try out any policing strategy without the knowledge and permission from the
IG’s office.
As observed, the police have been trying to decentralize the policing system to ensure
effective decision making and accountability at the local level through the opening of
police posts and neighborhood watch associations or schemes. These police posts have
almost all sections that are found at the main police stations to enable them work closely
with the local community. However, contrary to the recommendations of the 1994
situational analysis report, these police posts have not been given autonomy on how they
should police their local community. It is true that the police have brought policing
services nearer to the communities but with no discretion. As noted, and confirmed by the
key informant coordinating community policing at headquarters, “that matters of policing
are a preserve of the police command at headquarters. Having said this, does not mean
the local police are not allowed to suggest, they are but the process takes too long for the
suggestions to be taken on by the police command. Hence, most of the recommendations
are being ignored by the police hence discouraging the participation of the community.
This is because implementation cannot be done without being cleared and in many
instances there is no response. In some cases when the response is received, whatever the
local police wanted to do would have been overtaken by other events. Therefore, this has
obviously frustrated the efforts of the citizens especially through NWAs in trying to
improve security by being involved fully.
Finally, the problem seems to result from alleged poor supervision by supervisors in
the Zambia police service. Governance, particularly the management systems of the state
police, has become a key area of policing reform for the last 15 years in Zambia.
Therefore, the government that fails to put in place effective executive management
teams in its police service face high levels of police corruption, inefficient practices and
uncurbed crime rates. External complaints authority systems have their place, but bad
police practice is at heart a personnel management problem.
Yet the degree to which the government is prepared to tackle the necessary
supervision of its police service varies, despite the democratic reforms. Several recent
reports on the police service in Southern Africa (for instance, Amnesty International,
2002; Kliplin and Harrison, 2003) make it clear that in the majority of the Southern
African Development Community (SADC) countries, which include Zambia police
harass and disrupt the activities of the opposition leaders, trade union officials, youth
activists, human rights monitors and journalists. They also extort money from travelers
and from suspects or even from those wanting an investigation to take place. They
frequently use torture and coercive confessions during investigations and rarely, if ever,
are punished for such abuses. In addition, there is widespread use of summary killings of
suspects even prior to investigations.
It is universally agreed that weakly supervised police services are not natural allies of
the citizen, the community leaders, development organizations and even some members
of the government itself. This situation, not surprisingly, makes many individuals
conclude that they are on their own in the fight against crime and that if they want any
progress they must take matters into their own hands. As those who have authority, it
presses them to consider setting up alternative arrangement. Thus decisions about self-
policing are made against a background of state abandonment and police predatation.

4.5 CONCLUSION

From the above analysis and findings in sections one, two and three of chapter four (4) it
is very clear that in Lusaka urban, high densely populated areas stand out as having the
highest crime rates and part of the explanation lie in the very nature of communities.
These communities are far less developed, inevitably the communities are experiencing
widespread development of illegal occupation on site unplanned, overcrowded,
inadequately serviced, and often unsafe. The local authorities do not have the resources to
keep pace with demand for basic services such as housing, roads, piped water, health
services, and education and police service because in the first instance they were illegal.
Hence, the population of Lusaka urban residents in slums or shanties is the highest.
There are some positive developments and improvements in human rights observance,
composition of the police in terms of gender, relationship and trust between the police
and community and others. However, the overall picture regarding Zambia Police Service
ability to fulfill the elements or the main objective of community policing of reducing
crime by 50 percent in the year 2000 is negative. It is the contention of this study finding
that the Zambia police service has far fallen short of many of the benchmarks of
community policing such as failure to reduce crime rates by 50 percent and also failure to
improve on responding and quality of assistance to emergencies of crime problem when
called upon especially in high densely populated areas. Other major failures of
community policing in Zambia, include the exponential growth of corruption,
centralization, unprofessionalism and erosion of law. Further, the police lack resources
such as transport and equipments, lack of supervision, lack of manpower, and lack of
training. Furthermore, there has been a marked absence of political will from the
government by failing to put in place a legal framework to support and legalize
community policing strategy.
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 CONCLUSIONS

The analysis and findings of Zambia Police Reform Programme through community
policing in the study shows that since 1964, the government through the Zambia Police
Force then has been making huge efforts in improving crime policing strategies in
various communities to meet political and democratic governance challenges of this era.
In response to these challenges, policing reforms were launched to consolidate the rising
crimes with particular emphasis of changing the policing strategies. Thus in the 1970s,
the police force then put up reactive policing strategies or measures in the form of Flying
Squad, Anti-Robbery Squad and Vigilante Policing Schemes in 1986.
However, the fact remained that in spite of the efforts made by the Zambia Police
Force, the results achieved remained somewhat poor and the crime situation of many
communities, in many cases deteriorated. Owing to factors such as the politicization of
the Zambia Police Force, insufficient manpower, lack of transport, lack of accountability,
poor conditions of service and coupled with corruption which undermined not only
professionalism but also competence.
In Zambia, the Police Service is mainly organized along the lines similar to military
structure, with units that parallel those of other government departments: It is made up of
bureaus, divisions, and sections or units. Police mainly perform three categories of
functions: law enforcement, maintenance of order, and community services. The focus on
crime fighting policing which was more militaristic in the law enforcement alienated the
police from the community, as a result a great deal of tension and mistrust between the
police and community existed. Therefore, this made it difficult for the police to detect,
investigate and combat crime since there was no cooperation from the community. Police
efforts aimed at improving its policing strategies were also constrained by the
formulation and adoption of inappropriate policing strategies as well as poor and
ineffective implementation of the strategy. Even where strategy committees were created,
many of the recommendations were not being implemented. Further, police crime
strategies took a piecemeal approach, which focused on political issues to the negligence
of others. Hence in the 1990s, the Zambia police sought ways to change its image by
adopting innovative policing strategies in the form of community policing.
Consequently, the Zambia Police Reforms were initiated in 1994, and in 1995 the
Zambia Police adopted community policing as a strategy to combat crime through crime
prevention. The main aim of this strategy was ensuring not only the adequate
management of crime by the police, but also effective community police service delivery
through forging a partnership between the community and their police. In short, building
and strengthening of relationship between the police and community that would enhance
community participation in crime prevention in their communities. To this effect,
strategies or initiatives such as neighborhood watch associations, police posts, preventive
foot patrols and community-police awareness and sensitization programmes were
introduced or adopted with a view to promoting and encouraging community
participation in crime prevention, improving the quality of police services, increasing the
efficiency of service delivery and promoting police accountability and professionalism.
The analysis and findings in chapter three (3) of the study clearly indicated that in Lusaka
urban district, members of the public in all the three types of residential areas that is high,
middle and low densely populated are now increasingly looking to various forms of
community policing to assist the weak police service. Community policing is based on
the principle of co-ordination and consultation between the police and the policed, to
provide intelligence, guide security agendas and solutions and supplement police patrols.
There has been much skepticism of community policing programmes as western imposed
and ineffective, but there have been some successful partnerships between the police and
the community in most residential areas of Lusaka urban. For instance, the alienation that
denied them the civil cooperation needed to prevent and detect crime which in return
perpetuated police ineffectiveness has now reduced.
Further, in order for police to encourage organization reforms and greater community
participation in crime prevention the Zambia Police created Community Services
Division (CSD) at police headquarters and divisional or provincial police headquarters to
oversee the implementation of community policing and was also tasked to bring the
community closer to the police. The CSD oversees programmes that are carried out by
the Schools Liaison Unit, Crime Safety Unit, Chaplaincy Unit and Victim Support Unit.
Furthermore, to encourage Police- Public Relations, the police public relations
department was also improved in form of carrying programmes on both print and
electronic media that has encouraged cooperation and participation between the police
and the community. For instance, in collaboration with the public and private media
institutions, the police conduct radio and television programmes such as the “Police and
the Community” aimed at sensitizing the community on various issues such as
community safety and security. In addition, the police designs and publishes crime
awareness posters, brochures, leaflets and pamphlets in the community. By educating and
sensitizing the different stakeholders like the business people and home owners on the
effective security techniques and developing a good police-community rapport, citizens
feel safer and have less fear in dealing with the police. This programme by the Zambia
Police Service has proved to have yielded good results as it has increased the citizen’s
cooperation in providing information to assist in law enforcement. In addition, there is
more voluntary compliance with the law by the citizens, improved relations with the local
communities, and increased community support for police.
According to the study, there is evidence that in Lusaka Urban District there is a great
improvement on the public perception of the police. For instance, the study importantly
shows that there has been ‘a great improvement in police attitude’, particularly as regards
to cooperation and human rights observance.
Another positive thing that has resulted from community policing is that institutions
have been created to ensure sanity, professionalism and accountability in the police
service though they have only been partially successful in achieving some of the
objectives. For instance, the Police Public Complaint Authority (PPCA) has focused on
sanctions and not the source. Secondly, these institutions that were established to promote
ethics and accountability often lack the resources, public visibility, impartiality and
police support (most of their recommendations are ignored) that are critical to their
success. The enormity of the task of dealing with the erosion of the rule of law and to
promote ethics and accountability in the police service is not to be underestimated. In
spite of setbacks experienced in this regard, it is still possible to score gains in a
meaningful manner. Central to this dimension is the need for dedicated and sustained
implementation of comprehensive, broad-based and self-reinforcing measures by the
police service and the members of the community within the framework of democratic,
responsive, transparent and accountable governance.
From the analysis and findings of the study in chapter 4, it is clearly indicated that the
impact of community policing on crime and public attitude towards the police in Lusaka
urban district had both successes and failures. It was observed that both police and public
attitude towards crime varies according to communities they came and operated from.
From this perspective it is argued that crime is believed to be high and more feared in
poor residential areas (communities) of Lusaka which host high populations with non
formal employment. In these communities the police are seen to be slow in response to
their complaints and reports and hence prompting members of these communities getting
involved in the prevention and fighting of crime through neighborhood watch
associations.
It is the opposite in low densely populated areas where crime is feared less hence no
need for them to get involved in the policing of crime through neighbourhood watch
associations in their communities. However, in these communities police response to
crime problem is faster as they are easily accessed. It can then be stated that community
policing seems to be more appreciated in poor communities because that is where citizens
have shown interest to work and cooperate with the police than rich communities of
Lusaka. As a result of this we have greater community participation in crime prevention
in high and middle densely populated areas as compared to low densely populated areas.
This is because there are more community police posts and neighborhood watch schemes
in the high and middle densely populated areas of Lusaka urban district than in low
densely populated area.
With community policing strategy in place, in section two of chapter 4, the study
results indicated that the Zambia Police Service in some selected communities have
recorded significant achievements in the prevention of crime by applying different
strategies or initiatives of community policing such as neighbourhood watch association,
police post, foot patrols and community-police relations programmes on both print and
electronic media and school programs. The police have been rated favorably on various
ways for instance, victim support unit, human rights observance, performance, progress,
improved relations with the community, gender composition of the police service and
public image.
They may have been rated favorably on the above mentioned issues, yet they have
been rated negatively on consultation, professionalism, transparent and accountability,
effectiveness, crime prevention, training, corruption and the reduction of crime. This is
because the Police Service has been faced with a number of challenges, which reduced
the speed of the reform process hence affecting community policing implementation. For
instance, institutional capacity, which is essential to the success of police reforms, is
lacking or simply inadequate in the police service. There is also a broad consensus that a
deficit of manpower, inadequate finances, transport, infrastructure, stationary, and
inadequate training has also largely affected effective performance of the police in
community policing.
Further, the deficit of legal document to back community policing because of lack of
political will and a weak practice of accountability measures, corruption, and poor
conditions of service, politicization of the Zambia police service and lack of
professionalism are major contributing factors to the current inefficiency of the police
service and the inability of the police to manage crime effectively. The lack of
transparence and accountability in the management of community policing in the
prevention of crime, coupled with inappropriate information on the part of the
community, slows down the information and, hence the inability of stakeholders to
participate in the formulation, adoption and decision making in conjunction with the local
police in crime prevention strategies.
It is apparent from these findings that the community policing strategy implications
for the criminal tendency in the sample communities are highly complex and ambiguous.
Therefore, one generalization stands out that in the current form community policing
initiatives/programmes are rather unlikely to bring about a drastic reversal in the crime
tendency in Lusaka urban district. Simply stated, the evidence of crime-reducing effect in
some selected residential areas is too modest implying that the crime rate variance among
the communities is primarily a function of community policing measures. Community
policing is considered as a new and innovative strategy for improving the crime-
prevention ability of the police. However, considering the fact that the community
policing strategy itself was devised to make the prevention and fighting of crime more
effective, it is important to note that the community policing impact on crime reduction is
uncertain at best.
Therefore, the findings and the results cited in chapter 3 and 4 clearly suggest that the
excessive reliance of the current crime prevention policy on community policing
programmes, particularly the police patrol, unregistered nieghbourhood watch
associations and ungazzeted community police posts, is unjustifiable and lacks
rationality. Thus, the community policing strategy may offer psychological comfort to the
citizens, but not effective crime reduction.
The challenges highlighted in chapter 4 are surmountable, but to overcome them and
lay the foundations for a lasting crime strategy. It is important that the police service must
look into the current nature of community policing which makes it difficult to fully
involve the community and put in place accountability mechanisms. The changes
required for the roles on institutional character of the Zambia police and its crime policy
can only be realized if the citizen’s values are taken into consideration. Working
relationships need to change as well within the police service and between the
community to allow the flow of information and to remove the feeling of superiority or
inferiority among officers and citizens. Police officers must also change their attitude
towards each other and towards the public which is a precondition for rebuilding
confidence and providing security to the society. Leaders should also show the political
will to ensure compliance with the community policing. Consequently, future police
reform programmes should take all these factors into account when aiming to transform
the police service.

5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

In light of the above challenges, the following recommendations are made for successful
implementation of community policing by the Zambia police service:
• To bolster the fight against crime nationwide the national government would need
to allocate adequate financial and material resources such as transport, habitable
offices to police service especially the police stations and posts in order to
enhance its capabilities in terms of transportation, communication, crime fighting
gadgets and equipment.

• The CSD should be adequately funded as it is the centerpiece of community

policing implementation. In this sense it would be able to train more police
officers and members of the public through workshops, seminars, meetings and
sensitization programmes through community visitations by headquarters,
division and station coordinators.

• Another initiative is the need for the city council to take a center stage in crime
prevention through the Safe Cities Programme. This was launched in 1996 in
response to calls from mayors of large African cities who wanted to address urban
violence and were looking for a prevention strategy at the city level. It has been
implemented in Abidjan, Nairobi, Johannesburg, Durban, Dakar, Dar-es-Salaam
and Yaoundé. It seeks to create awareness, sensitize communities and build local
capacity in urban safety in partnership with other stake-holders, NGOs and CBOs.
At community level it drawns up proposals with neighbourhood leaders for job
creation as means of tackling the root causes of crime, as well as organizing
communities to promote urban safety. As Kisia (2004: 13)observes, the safer
cities approach ‘requires radical institution reform, partnership, a major shift in
attitude among civic leadership and genuine and broad- based participation in
decision making, which enhances citizenship and inclusion’.

• Police Public Complaints Authority should be decentralized to provincial and

district levels in order to provide an effective mechanism through which members
of the public can be afforded the opportunity to keep the operations of police
officers in check. Further more powers should be given to the authority not only
recommendations but punishment against the ailing officers.

• The Zambia police service needs to spearhead the formation of forums unlike
what is transpiring now, only concentrating on Neighbourhood Watch
Associations. Forums can bring together every local community organization,
international Non- Governmental Organization and Governmental Agency
concerned with improving quality of life in the community. Together they can
develop a community safety plan, share community and physical resources, and
create channels for referral to services provided by one another. Once a need is
identified, options can be sought that are state and non- state, or joint projects.
Brogden and Shearing (1993) speak of it as ‘dual policing’. The dual model
envisages the state police bearing primary responsibility for enforcement; while
problem- oriented (community) policing would be provided by state police in
conjunction with commercial, municipal and voluntary elements. Overall
responsibility for coordination and integration of policing networks would lie with
local government, though authoritative force would remain with the state police
 and national criteria would be established to determine the legislative units’ limits
of local civil autonomy. An example of this approach is South African Safety
Forums.

• The police service must ensure all police formations including the police posts are
adequately funded for all their operational functions so that the public does not
pay police services like stationary, transport and fuel which has led to corruption
and abuse of authority.

• Partnership with CSOs and the Private Sector. The involvement of the private
sector and the civil society organizations (CSOs and NGOs, etc) in crime fighting
is now recognized worldwide. The police service in Zambia should improve their
relationships with these organizations, and use them as partners in combating
crime rather than adversaries. Police service should promote dialogue with CSOs
and NGOs to reduce mutual suspicion and enhance partnership in combating
crime. Support for community policing initiatives by independent NGOs can be of
enormous benefit. In other countries they have promoted public discourse on
security threats; organized civic education programmes; raised knowledge of the
issues by distributing materials on security issues; commissioned research on the
legislative control and policing practices; obtained financial contributions from
the business sector for crime prevention work with the youth; lobbied
parliamentarians to support specific measure and resources to promote crime
prevention; and developed pilot schemes to take the activities forward.

• The government must put in place the legal structure for Community-Based
Policing in the Constitution and Police Act, then build crime policing policy on
that legal basis. This has been done in South Africa so that who ever takes over as
Inspector General of Police would build on what the other has left. Further the
creation of Crime Prevention Boards must also reflect in the Constitution stating
the composition of such board.

However, it should be made clear that not all the methods and tools outlined will
be applicable to all situations. Therefore, a careful and selective adaptation of
some elements to selected areas is essential. In that regard, it is also important to
note that police reform is concerned with a continuous improvement in all aspects
of crime policing. It aims to continuously improve results by improving capacity.
It should also be noted that the crime policy options outlined above are not
mutually exclusive. Combinations of them can be used. The over-riding principle,
however, is the need for a national strategy of law and order that integrates,
regulates, mobilizes, and empowers all those willing to preserve law and order in
acceptable manner.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Adler, Freda. (1995). Criminology (Second edition). New York: McGraw- Hill, Inc.

Adler, Freda. (1983). National Not Obsessed with Crime (Little, Cole: Fred B. Rothman
1983). New York: McGraw- Hill, Inc.

Altbeker, E. (1998). Solving Crime: The State of the SAPS Detective Service. Pretoria:
Institute for Strategic Studies.

Amnesty International, 1998, Senegal: Climate of Terror in Casamance. New York:

Amnesty International.

Baker, Bruce. (2008). Muilti- Choice Policing in Africa. Uppsala: Nordiska

Africainistitute.

Brogden,M, and C. Shearing, 1993, Policing for a New South Africa. London: Routledge.

Bowden, B. (1978). The Police, Crime, and Economic Theory: An assessment,

“American Sociological Review”. Washington, Dc: US Government Printing Office.

Brown, M. 1988. Working the street: Police discretion and dilammas of reform. New
York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Chazan, N., (1988), Ghana: Problems of Governance and the Emergency of Civil
Society, in L.Diamond, J. Lintz, and S. Lipset (eds), Democracy in Developing
Countries: Africa. Boulder; Lynne Reinner.

Chisanga, E., (2005). Establishment and Status of Commercial Plantations in,

Procceedings, 1st National Symposium on Timber Industry in Zambia, September,2005,
pg 1-9, Mission Press.

Cordner, W.G. and Trajanowicz. C, R. (1992). “Patrol” in what works in policing?

Operations and Administration Examined. Ohio: Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences.

Crosby, P. (1990). Leading. London: McGraw-Hill.

Daka, J. (2004). Sexual Offences in Zambia and how the Police deal with them. Lusaka.

Detals, R. (1977). The Methods of Public Health. New York, Oxford University Press.

Ebbe, Obi N.I. (1996). Comparative and International Criminal Justice Systems:
Policing, Judiciary and Corrections. Washington: Butterworth-Heinmann
Goldstein, H. (1990). Problem Oriented Policing. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.

Goldstein, H. (1977). Policing a free society. New York: Ballinger.

Grabosky, P and Hula,R.( 1992 ). The Politics of Crime and Conflict. Beverly Hills: Sage

Hanekon, S.X. and Thornhill, C. Public Administration in Contemporary Socierty: A

South African Perspective, Johannesburg, Macmillan South Africa, 1983.

Hatchard, J, and Ndulo, M. (1994). Reading in Criminal Law and Criminology in

Zambia. Lusaka: Multimedia Publications.

Jefferies, C., (1952). The Colonial Police. Londone: Allen and Unwin.

Jefferson, T., (1990). The case against Paramilitary Policing. Milton Keynes; Open
University Press.

Jones, T. and T. Newburn, (1998). Private Security and Public Policing. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.

Kenney, P.J. (1972). Police Personnel Administration. Spring Field III: Charles C.
Thomas.

Kinsey, R., J. Lea, and J. Young. 1986. Losing the fight against crime. London: Basil
Blackwell.

Kornblum, W. (1994). Sociology in changing World (Third edition). New York: Harcourt
Brace College Publishers.

Loader, I. (2000). ‘Plural Policing and Democratic Governance’, Social and Legal
Studies, 9, 3, 323-45.

Mamdani, M., (1996), Citizen and Subject, Contemporary Africa and the Legacy of Late
Colonialism. Kampala: Fountain Publishers.

Marks, M., (1998), ‘Policing for Democracy: A case for Paramilitary Policing in
Afriaca?’, Crime and Conflict,11

Meek, S., (2003), Policing Sierra Leone, in M.Malan, S.Meek, T.Thusi, J.Ginifer, and
P.Coker (eds), Sierra Leone; Building the Road to Recovery. Pretoria: Institute for
Stratagic Studies (ISS), monograph 80.

Muhamed, D. (2002). The Post Industrial Society: Tomorrows Social History: classes,
conflict and culture in the programmed society. New York: Random House.
Musonda, F, X. (2002). History and Reformation of Zambia Police Service. Lusaka:
University of Zambia Press.

Ndhlovu, F.K. (1994). Introduction of Community Policing in Zambia. Lusaka:

National Crime Statistics,(2008). Victim Support Unit, Police Headquarters, Lusaka

Pelser, E. (1999). The Challenges of Community Policing in South Africa. Pretoria:

Institute for Strategic Studies.

Reid, Sue Titus. (1994). Crime and Criminology. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace and Co.

Reiner, F. (2000). The Police in America. New York: McGraw- Hill.

Sallis, E. “The Machinery of Government”, An Introduction to Public Administration,

London, Holt, Reinhart and Winston, 1982.

Sherman, W, L. (1987). Repeat Calls to the Police in Minneapolis. Washington, D. C:

Crime Control Institute.

Skolnick,J., and Bayley, D. (1986). The new blue line: Police innovations in six
American cities. New York: Free Press.

Skolnick, J., and Bayley, D. (1988).Community Policing: Issues and Practices around
the World. Washington D.C: National Institute of Justice.

Skolnic, Jerome H., and James Fyfe. (1993). Above the Law: Police and the excessive
use of force. New York. Macmillan.

Sweeny, M, E. (1982). The Public and the Police: A Partnership in Protection.

Springfied, III: Charles C Thomas.

Tordoff, William. (1980). Administration in Zambia. Manchester. Manchester University

Press.

Vocino, T. and Rabin, J. (1981). Contemporary Public Administration, New York,

Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Inc.

Waddington, P., (1991). The strong Arm of the Law: Armed and Public Order Policing.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.

ARTICLES

Achola,P.P., (1990), Implementing Educational Policies in Zambia-1992.b) Gennaro, FV

(1987), The crime. In the Grolier interactive, 1987.
Ahire,P., 1991, ‘Re-Writing the Distorted History of policing in Colonial Nigeria’
International Journal of the Sociology of law,18,45-60
Bayley, D. and Shearing. (1996). ‘The Future of Policing’, Law and Society Review, 30,
585-606.

Bennett, T. and Wright, R (1984), Burglars on Burglary (Aldershot: Gower).

Bouman, M.,1987, A Note on Chiefly and National in Botswana’. ‘Journal of Legal

Pluralism, 25 and 26, 275-300

Bright, J. (1987), ‘Community safety, crime prevention and local authority’, in P.

Willmott (ed), Policing and the Community, Policy Studies Institute Discussion Paper 16
(London: Unwin Hyman).

Brogden, M. (2004). ‘Commentary: Community Policing: A Panacea from the West’, An

African Affairs, 103,413, 635-49.

Chanda, A.W, “The State Security Act v. Open Society: Does a Democracy Need
Secrets? 29 ZAMBIA LAW JOURNAL 33-48 (1997).

Chukwuma, I., 2001, ‘Police Transformation in Nigeria: Problems and Prospects’, paper
presented at ‘Crime and Policing in Transitional Societies’, Conference held 30 August-1
September 2000, South Africa, available at www.kas.de/pro home.

Cordner, W.G. (1985). “The Baltimore County Citizen-Oriented Police Empowered

Project: Final Evaluation”, Paper Presented to the America Society of Criminology. San
Diego.

Elias, R. (1986), ‘Community Control, crinminal justice and victim services’, in

E.A.Fattah(ed.), From Crime Policy to Victim Policy (London: Macmillan), pp. 290-316.

Forrester, D., Chatterton, M. and Pease, K. (1988). The Kirkholt Burglary Prevention
Project, Rochdale, Crime Prevention Unit Paper 13 (London: HMSO).

Goldsmith, A. (2003). ‘Policing Weak States: Citizen Safety and State Responsibility’,
Policing and Society, 13, 1, 3-21.

Hills, A, 2001, ‘Police Reform in Post-Colonial States’, paper prepared for the Workshop
on ‘Democratic Control of Policing and Security Sector Reform’, Geneva, Switzerland,
available at http:// www.dcaf.ch, Geneva Center for The Democratic Control of Police
Reform in Post-Colonial States.

Johnston, L. (2001). ‘Crime Fear and Civil Policing’, Urban Studies, 38, 5-6, 959-76.
Johnston, L. (1999). ‘Private Policing in Context’, European Juornal on Criminal Policy
and Research, 7, 2,175-96

Kempa M., R. Carrier, J. Wood and C. Shearing, (1999). Reflection on the Evolving
Concept of “Private Policing”’, European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research,
7,197-223.

Killingray,D., 1986, ‘The Maintenance of Law and Order in British Colonial Africa’,
African Affairs, 85, 411-37.

Kisia, P., 2004, ‘Promoting Peace, Safety and Security: The Role of Communities and
Local Governments’ paper prepared for Africa Local Government Action Forum,
available at www.worldbank.org/wbi,publicfinance/documents/ALGAF/KISIA.pdf

Klipin,J. and K. Harrison, 2003, The Future of Policing and Crime Prevention in SADC,
Canadian International Crime Prevention Center, available at http://www.crime-
prevention-intl.org/publications.php?type=OTHER

Kraska,P. and V. Kappelar, (1997), ‘Militarising American Police: The and

Normalisation of Paramilitary Units’, Social Problems, 44,1,1-18.

McCormack, R. (1987). International Corruption, A Global Concern, Paper presented to

the International Anti-Corruption Conference, Peru, 1997.

McCracken,J., 1986, ‘Coercion and Control in Nyansaland: Aspects of the History of a

Colonial Police Force’, Journal of African History, 27,127- 48

McMullan. (1987). ‘Policing the Criminal Underworld: State Power and Decentralized
Social Control in London 1550-1700’, in J. Lowman et al (Eds), Transcarceration: Essays
in the Sociology of Social Control. Aldershot: Gower, 119-38.

Newburn, T. (2001). ‘The Commodification of Policing: Security Networks in the Late

Modern City’, Urban Studies, 38, 5-, 829-48.

Pease, K. (1986), ‘Obscene telephone calls in England and Wales’, Howard Journal of
Criminal Justice, voL. 24: pp. 275-81

Rosenbaum, D.P. (1988), ‘Acritical eye on neighbourhood watch: does it reduce crime
and fear’ in T.Hope and M. Shaw (eds), Communities and Crime Reduction (London:
HMSO), pp. 126-45.

Shearing, C., and Wood, J. (2003). ‘Governing Security for Common Goods’,
International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 31, 3, 205-25.
Shearing, and M. Kempa, 2000, ‘The Role of “Private Security” in Transition
Democracies’, paper given at ‘Crime and Policing in Transition Societies’, Conference
held August 30- September 1 2000, South Africa, available at www.kas.de/proj/home

Stenning, P., (2000). ‘Powers and Accountability of Private Police’, European Journal on
Criminal Policy and Research, 8, 325-52

Throup, D., 1992, ‘Crime and Politics and the Police in Colonial Kenya, 1993-63’, in D.
Anderson and D.Killingray (eds). Policing and Decolonization: Politics, Nationalism and
the Police, 1917-1965. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 127-57

Tignore, R., 1971, ‘Colonial Chiefs in Chiefless Societies’, Journal of Modern African
Studies,9,3,339-59.

Weisburd, J., Mc Elrot, J., and Hardyman, P. (1988), “Challenges to Supervision in

Community Policing Observation on a Pilot Project”, American Journal of Police.

Willmott, P. (1987), ‘Introduction’, in P. Willmott (ed), Policing and the Community

(London: PSI), pp. 1-7.

DOCUMENTS AND REPORTS

Amnesty International, 2002, Southern Africa: Policing to Protect Human Rights: A

Survey of Police Practices in Countries of Southern African Development Community,
1997-2002, available at web.amnesty.org

Central Statistics Office (2003), 2002 Census of Population and Housing Report,
Lusaka:CSO.

Government of Zambia (Republic) 1996. Constitution of Zambia Amendment Act, 1996.

Lusaka: Government Printers.

Ministry of Home Affairs, Zambia Police Service, (2005). HIV and AIDS/STI/TB
Workplace Policy of the Zambia Police Service. Lusaka: Government Printers.

Musonda, F.X. (2001). Community Involvement in Policing Strategies. Lusaka.

South Africa (Republic). 1994. Constitution of South Africa Amendment Act, 1994

United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs 11/12/06.

WHO Zambia (1998), Country health system Profile, 1998.

Wood, B. (2000). Malawi Security Sector Reform Pilot Project Report: Sept 1999- Aug
2000.
Zambia Police Act Chapter 107 of the Laws of the Laws of Zambia. Lusaka: Government
Printers.

Zambia Police Annual Report, 1964, Ministry of Home Affairs, Lusaka.

Zambia Police Annual Report, 1986, Inspector Generals Office Police Headquarters,
Lusaka.

Zambia Police Annual Reports, 1995 to 2006, Inspector Generals Office Police
Headquarters.

Zambia Police Strategic Plan 1995-2001, Government Printers, Lusaka.

Zambia Police Strategic Plan 2001-2006, Government printers, Lusaka.

Zambia Police Service Standing Orders (2009) Revised Edition. Lusaka: Government
Printers

NEWSPAPERS

Post News Paper, 4th May 2010: “A Compromised Police is Danger to Society”.

Times of Zambia, July 24th, 2003

Times of Zambia, 12th February, 1988

APPENDICES
 APPENDIX 1

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR POLICE OFFICERS.

THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE
STUDIES

RESEARCH TOPIC: AN EVALUATION OF THE COMMUNITY POLICING

STRATEGY ON CRIME IN ZAMBIA: A CASE STUDY OF LUSAKA URBAN
DISTRICT.

Dear Respondent,

I am a student at the University of Zambia, Great East Road Campus, studying Public
Administration and carrying out a research as part of the fulfillment for the attainment of
a master’s degree in public administration. Please note that this is purely an academic
exercise, which will in no way harm anyone. You have been randomly selected to
complete this questionnaire. The information being solicited will be treated with utmost
confidentiality. Please answer as objectively as possible following the given instructions.

INSTRUCTIONS:

In answering the following questions, you are expected to:

1. Tick one of the options available to you.
For Example:
What kind of residential area do you operate from?
1. High (e.g. Chaisa) [√] 2. Middle (e.g. Emmasdale) [ ] 3. Low (e.g. Kabulonga) [ ]

2. Where appropriate, please write your responses in line spaces provided.

THANKING YOU IN ANTICIPATION FOR YOUR COOPERATION

Serial No. ..............

 FOR
OFFICIAL
USE ONLY

SECTION A: BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF RESPONDENT

1. What is your sex?

1. Male [ ] 2. Female [ ]

2. What is your marital status?

1. Married [ ] 2. Single [ ] 3. Divorced [ ] 4. Widowed [ ]

3. What is your standard of education?

1. Grade seven [ ] 2. Grade nine [ ] 3. Grade twelve [ ] 4. College [ ]
5. University [ ]

4. What is your rank?

1. Constable [ ] 2. Sergeant [ ] 3. Inspector [ ] 4. Chief
inspector [ ] 5. Assistant Superintendent [ ]

5. How long have you served in the Police Service?

1. Less than 1 year [ ] 2. 1-2 years [ ] 3. 3-4 years [ ] 4. 5-6 years [
] 5. More than 6 years [ ]
specify...................................................................................

6. What type of residential area do you operate from?

1. Low density area [ ] 2. Medium density area [ ] 3. High density area [ ]

7. How long have you served in the same residential area?

1. Less than one year [ ] 2. 1 year [ ] 3. 2 years [ ] 4. 4 years [ ]
5. More than 4 years [ ]

SECTION B: POLICE AND COMMUNITY POLICING

8. Are you aware of the community policing strategy put in place by the Zambia
Police Service as a strategy to fight crime in Zambia?
1 Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

9. Do you know what community policing is?

1. Yes [ ] 2 No [ ]

10. How would you describe the relationship between the Police and the
community in your area of operation?
1. Excellent [ ] 2. Very good [ ] 3. Good [ ] 4. Satisfactory [ ] 5.
Unsatisfactory [ ]

11. In your opinion, have the Police done much publicity to sensitize both the
Police officers and the members of the public on community policing in the area
you operate from?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

12. In your opinion, are the citizens in the community you operate from fully
involved in police initiatives to prevent crime and maintain order?
1. Very much involved [ ] 2. Much involved [ ] 3. Not much involved [ ]
4. Not involved [ ]

13. In the community you operate from, you as the Police do you consult and
agree with the members of the community on the type of the security priorities
and on ways to meet them?
1. Always consult and agree with the members of the community [ ]
2. Partially consult and agree with the members of the community [ ]
3. Do not consult and agree with the members of the community [ ]

14. Are the citizens in your community allowed to determine the crime strategy
for policing their community?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

15. If not to question 13 and no to question14, what do you think could be the
reason why the community is not consulted and allowed to determine crime
strategy for policing their community by the Police?
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

16. In your opinion, are the members of the community really co- producers of
public safety?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

17. If yes to question 16, do you have any Neighborhood Watch Association in
the community you operate from?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

18. If yes, how many Neighborhood Watch Associations are registered under your
area of jurisdiction?
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

19. Of the registered Neighborhood Watches Association, how would you

describe their activeness?
1. Very active [ ] 2. Active [ ] 3. Not active [ ]

20. If not active, in your opinion, what could be the reason why Neighborhood
Watches Association has not been active? …………………………………………
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

21. As Police, what type of support do you offer to these Neighborhood Watch
Associations?
1. Financial support [ ] 2. Technical support [ ] 3. Material support [ ]
4. Human resource support [ ].

22. As Police officers do you attend meetings organized by the Neighborhood

Watches Association in the community you operate from?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

23. If yes to question 22, how many times do you meet in a month to discuss
security measures in the community?
1. One time [ ] 2. 2 times [ ] 3. 3 times [ ] 4. 4 times [ ]
5. More than four times [ ]

24. As Police, do you offer any training on crime prevention strategies to the
community you are serving?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

25. If yes to question 24, what type of crime prevention strategies do you train
these associations in? ................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

26. As the Police, what type of programmes have you put in place in your area of
jurisdiction that involve citizens as co- producers of public
safety?........................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

SECTION C: THE IMPACT OF THE COMMUNITY POLICING ON CRIME

IN ZAMBIA

27. What action do members of the community usually take whenever they
experience crime?
1. Go to the Police Post/ Station [ ] 2. Go to Private Security Organizations [ ]
3. Go to Legal Resource Foundation [ ] 4. Go to the community leaders [ ]
5. None [ ]

28. What is the extent to which the crime is reported?

1. Always reported [ ] 2. Sometimes reported [ ] 3. Not reported [ ]
29. In your opinion, do you think the members of the community trust the Police
abilities to deal adequately with their crime problem?
1. Very much trust [ ] 2. Much trust [ ] 3. Not much trust [ ] 4. No
trust [ ]

30. If the response was 4 to question 29, what do you think could be the reason
why the community does not trust the abilities of the Police to deal with their
crime problem?
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

31. Is there any area within your area of jurisdiction where members of the
community are afraid to walk in the night?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

32. How would you describe the level of safety or security in the neighborhood
you operate from?
1. Very safe [ ] 2 Safe [ ] 3. Very unsafe [ ]

33. What type of crimes do you think the members of the community you serve
fear
most?..........................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
........................

34. Compared to the period before the introduction of community policing, how
would you describe the crime rate in the community you serve today?
1. Increasing [ ] 2. Decreasing [ ] 3. Remained the same as it
was [ ]

35. How would you describe crime in the community you serve as compared to
other communities of the city of Lusaka?

35a. Before the introduction of the community policing?

1. Less crime [ ] 2. More crime [ ] 3. The same as in other
communities [ ]

35b. After introduction of community policing?

1. Less crime [ ] 2. More crime [ ] 3. Same as before [ ]

36. As a Police officer, how would you rate the success of Zambia police since
the introduction of community policing strategy in its fight against crime?
1. Has made much progress [ ] 2. Has made some progress [ ]
3. Stood still [ ] 4. Lost much ground [ ]
37. How do you rate the performance of the Zambia Police since the introduction
of community policing 14 years ago?
1. Excellent [ ] 2. Very good [ ] 3. Good [ ] 4. Fair [ ] 5. Poor [
]

38. Do you think the introduction of Neighborhood Watch Associations have

assisted in reducing crime in the community you operate from?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

39. Do you think the members of the community have trust in the Neighborhood
Watch Association as one of the providers of community safety?
1. Very much trust [ ] 2. Much trust [ ] 3. Not much trust [ ] 4. No
trust [ ]

39. How would you describe the relationship between the Police and the members
of the public in the community you operate from?
1. Excellent [ ] 2. Very good [ ] 3. Good [ ] 4. Satisfactory [ ] 5.
Unsatisfactory [ ]

40. How would you describe the Police observance in human rights before the
introduction of community policing in 1994?
1. Very much observed [ ] 2. Less observed [ ] 3. Not observed [ ]

41. What has been an effect of community policing in human rights observance
by the Police?
1. Very much observed [ ] 2. Less observed [ ] 3. Not observed [
]

SECTION C: CHALLEGES OF COMMUNITY POLICING IN ZAMBIA

41. In your own opinion has community policing strategy been effective in
reducing crime in the community you operate from?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

42. If no to question 41, what do you think could be the reason why community
policing has not been effective? ................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

43. What type of problems do you face as the Police to effectively implement
community policing in fighting crime in the community you operate from?............
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
........................
44. What type of problems does Neighborhood Watch Associations in your area
of operation face that has made them ineffective to participate in crime prevention
and public safety? .....................................................................................................
………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………

45. In your opinion, what are the major challenges that have negatively affected
the success of community policing strategy in reducing crime in the community
you operate?...............................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

46. What do you think is the most important thing the Police and the community
have to do to be more effective in the fight against crime?.......................................
....................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................
 APPENDIX 2
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL
SCIENCES
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE STUDIES

RESEARCH TOPIC: AN EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE COMMUNITY

POLICING STRATEGY IN ZAMBIA: A CASE STUDY OF LUSAKA URBAN
DISTRICT.

Dear Respondent,

I am a student at the University of Zambia, Great East Road Campus, studying Public
Administration and carrying out a research as part of the fulfillment for the attainment of
a master’s degree in public administration. Please note that this is purely an academic
exercise, which will in no way harm anyone. You have been purposively selected to
complete this questionnaire. The information being solicited will be treated with utmost
confidentiality. Please answer as objectively as possible following the given instructions.

INSTRUCTIONS:

In answering the following questions, you are expected to:

1. Tick one of the options available to you.
For Example:

What kind of residential area do you operate from?

1. High (e.g. Chaisa) [√] 2. Middle (e.g. Emmasdale) [ ] 3. Low (e.g. Kabulonga) [ ]
2. Where appropriate, please write your responses in line spaces provided.

THANKING YOU IN ANTICIPATION FOR YOUR COOPERATION

Serial No. ..............

 OFFICIAL
USE ONLY

SECTION A: BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF RESPONDENT

1. What is your sex?

1. Male [ ] 2. Female [ ]

2. What is your age? ….............................................................................................

3. What is your marital status?

1. Married [ ] 2.Singe [ ] 3.Divorced [ ] 4.Widowed [ ]

4. What is your standard of education?

1. Grade 7 [ ] 2. Grade 9 [ ] 3.Grade 12 [ ] 4. College [ ] 5. University [ ]
6. Non-formal [ ]

5. What kind of residential area do you come from?

1. Low (e.g. Kabulonga) [ ] 2. Middle (e.g. Emmasdale) [ ] 3. High (e.g.
Chaisa) [ ]

6a.What is your occupation?......................................................................................

6b. Formal employment or Informal employment?...................................................

SECTION B: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN THE COMMUNITY POLICING

STRATEGY
8. Are you aware of the community policing strategy initiated by the Zambia
Police to fight crime in your community?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

9. Do you know what the community policing is?

1. No [ ] 2. Yes [ ]

10. In your opinion, have the Police done much publicity to sensitize both the
Police and the members of the public on the community policing in your area?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

11. Do you think the citizens in your community are fully involved in Police
initiatives of preventing crime and maintaining order?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

12. Does the Police consult and agree with the community on the type of the
security priorities and on ways to meet them?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]
13. If no to question 12, what do you think could be the reason why the Police do
not consult the public on security priorities and ways to meet them?
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

14. Is your community able to monitor and evaluate the Police effectiveness and
efficiency in its service delivery?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

15. If your answer is no to question 14, what could be the reason why the
community is unable to monitor and evaluate the Police effectiveness and
efficiency in its service deliver? …………………………………………………...
………………………………………………………………………………………

16. In your opinion, are the public or citizens really co-producers of public safety?
1. Yes [ ] 2.No [ ]

17. If your answer was yes to question 16, do you have any Neighborhood Watch
Associations in your community?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

18. If your answer was yes to question 17, are you a member of any
Neighborhood Watch Associations?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

19. If you are a member, do you meet as members to discuss security safety
measures in your community?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

20. If yes to question 19, how many times do you meet in a month?
1. Once [ ] 2.2 times [ ] 3.3 times [ ] 4. 4 times [ ]

21. If yes to question 19, do the Police offer any advice and training on the
prevention strategies and on the type of cases that you should handle?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

22. If yes to question 19 and 21, what are these strategies and cases that you
should handle? ……………………………………………………………………
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

23. If yes to question 18, do the police give you enough support that you need to
effectively run your Neighborhood Watch Association Programs?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

24. If yes to question 23, what type of support do you receive from the Police?
1. Financial support [ ] 2.Human support [ ] 3.Material support [ ]
4.Other support [ ] ….............................................................................................

SECTION C: THE IMPACT OF THE COMMUNITY POLICING ON CRIME

IN ZAMBIA

26 Do you know what crime is?

1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

27. Have you ever experienced crime before?

1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

28. If yes to question 27, how many times?

1.1-2 times [ ] 2.3-4 times [ ] 3. More than 4 times [ ] 4. N\A

29. What action do you usually take when you experience crime?
1. Go to the Police Post or Station [ ] 2. Go to the Private Security
Organizations [ ]
3. Go to Legal Resource Foundation [ ] 4. Go to the community leaders [ ]
5. Other, please specify………………………………………………………….
6. None [ ]

30. If you do not go to the Police Post or Station, what are the reasons?
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
........................

31. If you go to the Police Post or Station, do you trust the Police ability to deal
with your crime problem adequately?
1. Very much trust [ ] 2. Much trust [ ] 3. Not much trust [ ] 4. No trust [ ]

32. Whenever you go to the Police Station or Police Post, have the Police dealt
with your complaint adequately?
1. Very much adequately [ ] 2. Adequately [ ] 3.Not adequately [ ]

33. Is there any area within your community where you are afraid to walk alone in
the night?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

34. After the introduction of Police Posts and Neighborhood Watch Associations,
how do you personally feel on the streets of your community today?
1. More afraid and uneasy [ ] 2. Less easy [ ] 3. Not much different
from the way you felt before Police Posts and Neighborhood Watch Schemes
were introduced [ ]

36. How do you feel in your neighborhood in the night?

1. Very safe [ ] 2. Safe [ ] 3. Pretty safe [ ] 4. Unsafe [ ]
5. Very unsafe [ ]

37. What type of crimes do you fear most in your community?

1. Rape and defilement [ ] 2. Burglary and theft [ ] 3. Robberies [ ]
4 Other, specify.......................................................................................................

38. Since the introduction of a Police Post and Neighborhood Watch Association,
how do you describe the crime rate in your area?
1. Increasing [ ] 2. Decreasing [ ] 3. Remained the same as it was [ ]

39. How would you rate crime in your community before the introduction of a
Police Post and Neighborhood Watch Association as compared to other
communities of the city?
1. Less crime [ ] 2. More crime [ ]
3. The same as other communities in the city [ ]

40. How would you describe crime in your community after the introduction of
the Police Posts and Neighborhood Watch Association as compared to other
communities of the city?
1. Less crime [ ] 2. More crime [ ] 3. Remained the same as it was [ ]

41. As a citizen, how would you describe the success of Zambia Police since the
introduction of Police Posts and Neighborhood Watch Associations?
1. Has made much progress [ ] 2. Has made some progress [ ] 3. Stood
still [ ]
4. Lost much ground [ ]

42. Do you think by putting more Policemen and Neighborhood Watch Personnel
on patrol would discourage criminal activities in your community?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

43. How do you rate the Police performance in your community today?
1. Excellent [ ] 2. Very good [ ] 3. Good [ ] 4. Fair [ ] 5.
Poor [ ]

44. How does Police in your community respond to your calls for assistance?
1. Less than 10 minutes [ ] 2. After 30 minutes [ ] 3. After 1 hour [ ]
4.Other
specify,.....................................................................................................................

45. How do you rate the quality of assistance by the Police since the introduction
of community policing 14 years ago in your community?
1. Excellent [ ] 2. Very good [ ] 3. Good [ ] 4. Fair [
] 5. Satisfactory [ ] 6.
Unsatisfactory [ ]
46. How would you describe the relationship between the Police and the
community after the introduction of community policing 14 years ago?
1. Excellent [ ] 2. Very good [ ] 3. Good [ ] 4. Fair [ ] 5. Satisfactory [ ]
6. Unsatisfactory [ ]

47. How would you describe the Police in human right observance before the
introduction of Community Policing 14 years ago?
1. Very much observed [ ] 2. Observed [ ] 3. Partially observed [ ]
4. Not observed [ ]

48. What has been an effect of Community Policing Strategy in Police human
rights observance?
1. Very much observed [ ] 2. Observed [ ] 3. Partially observed [ ]
4. Not observed [ ]

SECTION D: THE CHALLENGES OF COMMUNITY POLICING

49. In your opinion, has community policing strategy been effective in reducing
crime in your community?
1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

50. If no to question 49, what do you think could be the reason why community
policing strategy has not been effective?...................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

51. What type of problems do you think the Police and Neighbourhood Watch
Assocition face to effectively implement community policing strategy in fighting
crime in the communities? …………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………

52. In your opinion, what do you think are the major challenges that have
negatively affected the success of the neighborhood watch associations in your
community?………………………………………………………………………..
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

53. What do you think is the most important thing that the Police and the
community have to do to be more effective in the fight against
crime?.........................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................
 APPENDIX 3
INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR KEY INFORMANTS IN COMMUNITY
POLICING.
(QUESTIONS TO KEY INFORMANTS SPEARHEADING COMMUNITY
POLICING STRATEGY IN THE ZAMBIA POLICE SERVICE)
1. When did you get involved with community policing and in what capacity?
2. What do you think were the reasons why the Zambia police force introduced
community policing strategy?
3. Before the introduction of community policing strategy, what strategies was
Zambia police force using both to prevent and fight crime in the communities?
4. What do you think was the reason why community policing was adopted and not
any other crime prevention strategy?
5. How is the administration structure like for the community policing at national,
provincial, district, station and post level?
6. Do you think the administrative structure you have stated is present and very
active at every level?
7. Do you receive any financial, material and technical support for the community
policing activities apart from the police and the central government?
8. What type of crime prevention activities does community policing offer?
9. Do you provide any training to officers directly involved in community policing?
10. If you do, can you specify?
11. How many officers have been trained in community policing so far and are there
any plans for more training in future?
12. During police training does the police service offer any lessons in community
policing?
13. At station level, are there lectures conducted specifically on community policing
to all police officers?
14. What is the role of police officers in community policing?
15. Are there any sensitization programmes that your office undertakes to educate the
police officers and members of the public on community policing?
16. If they are, how has been the response from the police and members of the public?
17. To what extent has the member of the public been cooperative in community
policing?
18. How is the police accountable to the public?
19. What strategies have you put in place to promote community participation in
crime prevention and crime fighting in their neighborhoods?
20. What has been the response like from the community on these strategies?
21. If the response has been positive, has the community been able to form some
Neighborhood Watch Associations to prevent and fight crime in their area?
22. If so, how many Neighborhood Watch Associations are registered in your area of
jurisdiction?
23. What role do these Neighborhoods Watch Associations play in community
policing?
24. Do you offer any training to the members of the Neighborhood Watch
Associations?
25. If you do, what type of training?
26. Are there any specific measures that you have put in place to monitor the
activities of the Neighborhood Watch Associations?
27. How active are they? And if not active, what could be the reason why they have
not been active?
28. In what ways can they be improved to be active?
29. How is the working relationship between the Police and the Neighborhood Watch
Associations?
30. Have the members of Neighborhood Watch Associations assisted the Police to
prevent and fight crime in their neighborhoods?
31. If not what are the reasons?
32. What could be done to make the Neighborhood Watch Associations effective?
33. What do you think are the major problems faced by both Police and
Neighborhood Watch Associations to effectively implement community policing
strategy?
34. In your opinion, what do you think the police can do to improve crime prevention
through community policing strategy?
 APPENDIX 4

Table A . Summary of Data Collection Technique

The table below shows various techniques which, were employed to obtain the
responses from the interviewees

Objective Nature Source Data Instrument

of collection
Information Technique

To identify and Historical Police literature i.e. Desk Survey Literature

examine the policing background of Police journals, Search
strategies put in place police in Zambia books, government
to fight crime in policy documents
Zambia.
Policing strategies
put in place in the Key-Informants i.e. Interview Interview
colonial time, first, CSD and VSU Guide
second and third national, division,
republic. and station
coordinators

To assess the impact Knowledge of Police officers in Distribution Questionnaire

of community police officers and police stations and of
policing strategy on the public on the police posts and questionnaire
crime, and public meaning and members of the
attitude towards awareness of public
crime and police community policing.

Community policing NWA Members, Interview Interview

strategies and VSU and CSD Guide
programmes put in Coordinators.
place
Police Officers Distribution Questionnaire
of
questionnaire

Impact of Public and police - Questionnaire

community policing officers
Strategy on crime,
public attitude CSD and VSU Interview
towards crime and Interview
coordinators and
police guide
NWA members
To state and examine Investigating Police officers and Distribution Questionnaire
factors affecting problems that have Members of the of
community policing negatively affected public questionnaire
strategy in Zambia. the smooth
implementation of
community policing.
CSD and VSU Interview Interview
coordinators at Guide
national, divisional,
station level and
officers at police
posts

NWA members

APPENDIX 5

Table B: Schedule Interviews Done

Name of Date of Interview Designation Organisation
Interviewee
W/ Insp Tiki Co-ordinator
2nd December 2009 Community Safety Zambia Police
Police Station Service

Mr Zabwino Committee Member Nyumba Yanga

Palibe 18th December 2009 Neighbourhood
Watch Association
Insp Mbaula Coordinator Victim
4th January 2010 Support Unit Police Zambia Police
Station Service

Coordinator Victim
W/Cost 11th January 2010 Support Unit Zambia Police
Shinengene Community Police Post Service
Mrs. Saladi Coordinator Community Zambia Police
14th January 2010 Service Division Service
Lusaka Division
Mr. Ndalama 26th January 2010 Chairman Neighbourhood
Watch Association
 Insp Shipikili 4th February 2010 Coordinator Community Zambia Police
Safety Service
Lusaka Division
Chaisa Resident
Mr PachePache 11thFebruary 2010 Vice Chairman Development
Committee

C/Insp Dandabula Coordinator Schools

16thFebruary 2010 Liaison Unit Police
Station Zambia Police
Service

Ms Kamugomo 22nd February 2010 Committee Member Zambia Crime

Prevention
Foundation
Mr Bonongwe 26th February 2010 Officer In Charge Police Zambia Police
Station
Insp Chisamba Coordinator Schools Zambia Police
4th March 2010 Liaison Unit Service
Lusaka Division
D/Insp Chizule Criminal Investigation Zambia Police
th
16 March 2010 Officer Community Service
Police Post

Costable Beat Constable

th
Kambwiri 30 March 2010 Community Police Post Zambia Police
Service

C/Insp Silozi 7th April 2010 Officer In-Charge

Community Police Post Zambia Police
Service

W/ Insp Foloko 16th April 2010 Officer In-Charge Police

Station Zambia Police
Service

Mr Nkalamu Chipata
th
5 May 2010 Coordinator Neighbourhood
Watch Association

Mr. Mbwiri 21st May 2010 National Coordinator

Community Services Zambia Police
Division Service
D/ Sgt Mbuzi Criminal Investigations
th
8 June 2010 Officer Community Zambia Police
Police Post Service
Mrs. Sibweni 14th July 2010 Public Relations Officer University Teaching
Hospital