If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. LAW ENFORCEMENT IN A NEW CENTURY AND A CHANGING WORLD Improving the Administration of Federal law Enforcement ()F Criminal ,lustics HeierEmce Service (NC,JRS) MD 2084%000 Report of the Commission on the Advancement of Federal law Enforcement COMMISSION ON THE ADVANCEMENT Of fEDERAl LAW ENfORCEMENT January 2000 The Honorable Strom Thurmond President Pro Tempore United States Senate The Honorable Tom Daschle Minority Leader United States Senate The Honorable J. Dennis Hastert Speaker United States House of Representatives The Honorable Richard Gephardt Minority Leader United States House of Representatives The Honorable William Rehnquist Chief Justice of the United States Gentlemen: Public Law 104-132 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) pro- vided for the establishment of a Commission on the Advancement of Federal Law Enforcement. The Commission, created as an independent advisory body, was asked to report to Congress and the American People on a wide variety of matters related to Federal law enforcement. Section 806 of the legislation created this five-member Commission-one each to be appointed by the President Pro Tempore and Minority Leader of the Senate; one each by the Speal<er and Minority Leader of the House of Representatives; and one to be appointed Chair by the Chief Justice of the United States. In addition to authorizing the Commission to hold hearings in pursuit of its mandate, to sit and tal<e testimony, to administer oaths to witnesses appearing before it, and to secure information directly from any department or agency of the United States, the statute directed the Commission to submit a report to the Congress and the public within 2 years. I am pleased to submit that report. I want to aclmowledge the diligence with which my colleagues on the Commis- sian pursued the complex and wide-ranging mandate incorporated into our statute. The Commission took its responsibilities seriously, determined to be vigorous in its discussions, candid in sharing its views and opinions, and straightforward in its recommendations on what needs to be done. Although individual members some- times emphasized different issues, the Commission was unanimous in supporting the broad themes and recommendations presented in this document. I would also like to thank each of you for your confidence in the Commission's ability to complete this challenging assignment Your support helped the Commission complete its task on schedule. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the Commission staff-working under the able leadership of Executive Director Dr. Lee Colwell, General Counsel Michael E. Shaheen Jr., and Director of Research Richard J. Fera- for their unfailing service. Respectfully submitted, William H. Webster Chairman MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ON THE ADVANCEMENT OF FEDERAl lAW ENFORCEMENT William H. Webster, Chairman Senior Partner, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy Washington, D.C. ~--Donald-C~Dahlini-------Vice-f'residennor Academrc Affarrs University of South Dakota Vermillion, South Dakota Gilbert G. Gallegos National President Fraternal Order of Police Albuquerque, New Mexico Robert E. Sanders, Esq. Attorney Punta Gorda, Florida v Robert M. Stewart Chief, South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) Columbia, South Carolina Lee Colwell Executive Director Michael E. Shaheen Jr. General Counsel Richard J. Fera Director of Research Carmelita R. Pratt Administrative Officer Jacqueline A. Mitchell Executive Assistant CONTENTS Executive Summary------------------- 1 Introduction ______________________ 15 Chapter One. A Large and Complex System _________ 27 Chapter Two. Coordination: Who's in Charge of What? ____ 45 Chapter Three. Terrorism 61 T Chapter Four. Globalization of Crime ___________ 71 Chapter Five. Federalization of Crime ___________ 87 Chapter Six. Professionalism, Integrity, and Accountability __ 95 Chapter Seven. Recommendations ____________ 107 Endnotes 131 Selected Bibliography 143 vii Appendixes 159 Appendix A. Biographies of the Commissioners 160 Appendix B. Authorizing Legislation 164 Appendix C. Federal Organizations with Some Law Enforcement Functions __________ 168 Appendix D. Executive Order No. 11396 172 Appendix E. Commission Meetings and Witnesses 174 Appendix F. Expert Papers and Advisors 181 Appendix G. Personnel Authorized to Carry Firearms in 14 Federal Agencies ___________ 183 Appendix H. Acknowledgments 184 ~ tJ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY its review of the data and testimony and its deliberations were com- pleted, the Commission on the Advancement of Federal Law Enforcement reached broad agreement on several major themes and directions for the future. First and foremost, Commission members found that Federal law enforcement agencies are currently among the finest in the world_and_thaLmoslArnericans-Share-in-that-view•~.--------- (The Commission defines Federal law enforcement as the entire range of activities and operations, at tl1e national level, that are intended to prevent crime, apprehend and prosecute offenders, 1 and maintain the country's corrections system.) Second, Commission members believe that law enforcement stands at the thresh- 1 old of a new century and a changing world, and that, as the Nation moves into a new era, several challenges threaten its capacity to maintain and improve its system of Federal law enforcement. These challenges are as follows: 1. Difficult coordination challenges. Within the spectrum of Federal agencies involved in law enforcement, it is not always clear which organization has responsibility for handling specific types of crimes. Managing diverse agencies, their missions and priorities is a constant challenge. Although many examples of excellent coordination exist across Federal agencies-and among Federal, State, and local agencies-equally valid examples of poor coordination are also easy to find. The United States lacks clearly articu­ lated, easy-to-understand policies that dictate which agencies have responsi­ bilities for which areas of criminal activity and how the many Federal agen­ cies and officials with law enforcement responsibilities should coordinate their activities. In addition, poor integration of domestic and foreign intelli- gence capabilities limits effective law enforcement and is a menace to the national interest. 2. Terrorism. The threat that the easy availability of weapons of mass destruc- lion poses to American citizens is real. These devices-including conven- tiona!, biological, chemical, and even nuclear weapons-have the potential to enable individuals and groups to inflict the kind of damage on communities and civilians that was once the exclusive power of nation-states. Although incidents of terrorism have decreased in recent years, the lethal power of these types of weapons leads to more casualties. Moreover, the purposes for terrorist acts have changed. Historically, terrorists have sought political attention and influence, and their acts resulted in few deaths. Today, the goal of many terrorists is to kill large numbers of people. 3. Globalization of crime. Criminal enterprises in Asia, Europe, Latin America, and the Former Soviet Union are an increasing threat to American citizens and our national interests. Criminals are increasingly demonstrating an ability to cooperate with each other across national borders in areas such 2 as narcotics and money-laundering. Their access to and skill in using ad- vanced technologies often put U.S. law enforcement agencies at a disadvan­ tage. Modern telecommunications and computers maim large-scale theft and fraud possible through keyboards located anywhere in the world. 4. Federalization of crime. Over the years, the growth in the number of crimes considered "Federal" is startling. In 1789, perhaps a dozen crimes were considered sufficiently serious to warrant Federal attention; today that total exceeds 3,000. Federalizing common crimes-crimes that historically were the responsibility of State and local law enforcement agencies-has placed U.S. society in danger of having Federal law enforcement resources spread much too thinly. If the trend continues, the United States will develop the type of national police force that we have traditionally avoided. 5. Maintaining professionalism and demonstrating accountability. As the new century dawns, the challenge of maintaining public confidence in the integrity and competence of Federal agencies is an urgent priority. The lack of common standards that govern Federal law enforcement agency profes- sionalism, integrity, and public accountability needs to be addressed. In addition, Federal law enforcement agencies must upgrade the technological skills of officers, and the technologies available to them, if the officers are to perfonn as effective law enforcement professionals in a new century. POLICY CONClUSIONS Based on its investigation, the Commission came to five broad policy conclusions about the performance of the Federal law enforcement system. Conclusion 1. Coordination Of necessity, the Federal law enforcement apparatus is large and complex; in the face of this complexity, the Government's capacifLfor oversight and coordinatiou_js_______ _ weak and needs improvement. In addition, the proliferation of small agencies should be discouraged and the function of Inspectors General reviewed. Different agencies quite properly have different missions, as well as the need for quite distinct skills and areas of jurisdiction. Nonetheless, better coordination of operations 3 is