Most people would agree that police are responsible for ensuring that robbers and other criminals are kept off the streets and apprehended when they cross the line. But what happens when theft cases increase to such an extent that police cannot cope with? Enter community policing, focusing their efforts on anti-theft initiatives that have achieved credible results across China. However, due to the related social problems stemming from this form of crime fighting, in some parts of the country this practice has been banned. The problems vary from community organization members abusing caught robbers to cases of vigilantes and their families being injured when cornering dangerous robbers.

In Haikou, the capital city of south China’s Hainan Province, however, the local police openly recruited civilian anti-crime volunteers in April. Today, these volunteers have become members of the anti-theft volunteer team administered by the city’s traffic and patrol police.

According to a survey on China’s sina.com website, 88.62 percent of respondents support what the Haikou police have done and believe that to officially recognize civilian anti-theft volunteers will help to more efficiently reduce robberies. Only 9.46 percent believe that catching robbers is solely the police’s business and that it’s dangerous for civilian organizations to carry out this work.

Despite the high support rate, there are still those who believe that it’s improper to standardize these civilian organizations by incorporating them into the police force. They are calling for anti-crime community volunteer organizations to have their own legal status and exist as an independent entity, not subject to the police.

Let civilians get involved

Jun Qiu (www.gxnews.com.cn): There is a big demand for an effective anti-theft force, but from whichever perspective one looks at it, to catch robbers is the police’s business. Thus, no matter how many people support the Haikou police’s action to incorporate the civilian anti-theft volunteer organizations, it is suspected that the police are deliberately shirking their responsibilities. After all, the police are the designated guardians of our security and the onus of preventing crime should not be placed on civilians. In order to better protect the public’s property, what is more effective? Is it better to strengthen the police force or to recruit more volunteers?

It’s true that civilian organizations can help to catch robbers too, but isn’t it better for the police to act more effectively than to recruit anti-theft volunteers? If the police are permitted to transfer the right of law enforcement to volunteers, then such government departments as industrial and commercial bureaus and taxation bureaus can all do the same. Under these circumstances, why do we then need to keep these institutions?

Shu Shengxiang (Dahe Daily): China has an understaffed police force, and volunteers prove to be an unlimited human resource bank. Indeed, by incorporating volunteers, the police can legalize civilian organizations, which will assist the work of both parties.

Many people therefore applauded the initiative. However, I think they are over optimistic. As we all know, to catch robbers is the responsibility of the police and it is because people want a safe living environment that they depend on the police to do this work. There is a prerequisite, however. The right to enforce the law is not to be abused. If they officially incorporate anti-theft volunteers, the police are acting without a legal basis. Since excessive authority will lead to power abuse, it’s dangerous to grant law enforcement rights to a group of civilians.

In essence, civilian anti-theft organizations are trying to strengthen social justice, but after being incorporated into the police, they will become a tool to help police reduce the costs of law enforcement. Gradually the police may become reluctant to carry out their duties, and instead would transfer the burden to the volunteers. Eventually these volunteers will be the major force against robbers, while the police will sit idly by. If this happens, it will bring social justice into disrepute.

If civilians are incorporated into the police, their initial desire of being a volunteer is replaced by the semi-professional practice of operating within a police system. The question must then be asked: Will they continue to fight for justice in the same way after incorporation?

Gao Yongfeng (Youth Daily): The significance of civilian anti-theft organizations lies in its nongovernmental nature, which is different from the government’s work style and reflects the Chinese people’s rising sense of citizenship. It is a natural desire of citizens’ will to safeguard social justice.

By incorporating civilian organizations into the police force, the government is actually reclaiming the right of civilians to fight crime. In daily life many people do not have the courage to confront robbers and may choose to be indifferent and flee the scene.

Against this background, it’s unwise to announce that the fight against criminals “has nothing to do” with the public, when in fact we should do more to encourage everybody to protect social justice.

Civilian anti-theft organizations are based on citizens’ sense of justice. Its being incorporated into the police force reveals the lack of a tolerant environment for the existence of nongovernmental organizations in China. The Haikou police’s practice is only one of the ways to standardize this type of civilian group, and it’s not right to impose such a fate on all such groups. In order to encourage more people to maintain social order, it’s necessary to find better ways to help them to act more effectively while remaining citizens groups.

Need to work with police

Ma Bi (Changjiang Times): Civilian anti-theft organizations act on moral disciplines. Having deterred thieves, they are also a useful supplement to the understaffed police force. This is a reflection of the ordinary people’s will to safeguard social justice. More importantly, it shows that people are more actively engaged in social governance and take a hand in running their own society.

However, as community organizations are set up on the basis of social morality, their code of conduct is moral standards and not laws. Besides, due to the lack of legal protection, volunteers and their families are often threatened and attacked by criminals. On the other hand, there is no lack of cases that show the volunteers violate laws when going about their business. Thus, these groups are slipping into an embarrassing situation. While they are trying to protect and promote social moral standards, there are no explicit laws to validate their actions.