ABSTRACT
This study assessed the role of alternative dispute resolution options in the complaints management systems of the eight policing jurisdictions in Australia and the single jurisdiction of New Zealand. The available literature shows that a large proportion of complainants would like to participate in mediation, and that both complainants and police who experience mediation report much higher rates of satisfaction than those experiencing traditional adversarial investigative and adjudicative processes. Experiences with informal dispute resolution or ‘conciliation’ options are more mixed, and they are susceptible to tokenism and misuse as a convenient administrative means of disposing of complaints. Despite this situation, the data obtained from police and oversight agency sources in this study showed that options were limited to informal resolution conducted by senior officers, with an ostensible focus on behavioral improvement but with no meaningful publicly available data on outcomes. The paper concludes by advocating for a best practice complaints management system that includes mediation within a consultative framework focused on behavioral improvement.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Mary Riley
Mary Riley is an Associate Lecturer in the School of Law at the University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia, where she teaches courses in mediation, criminal law and corrections.
Tim Prenzler
Tim Prenzler is a Professor of Criminology in the School of Law at the University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia, where he co-ordinates the Bachelor of Criminology and Justice and teaches courses in policing and crime prevention.
Nadine McKillop
Nadine McKillop is a Lecturer in the School of Law at the University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia, where she teaches courses in crime theories, crime research methods and youth justice.