Balancing Anti-Terrorism With Prudence : Police Commission needs to be careful not to grant LAPD too much discretion

Immediately after the Oklahoma City bombing in April, the Los Angeles Police Commission moved to relax its rules governing Police Department investigations of suspected terrorists by sanctioning wider use of undercover operatives, electronic surveillance and civilian informants. At the time, some commissioners and Mayor Richard Riordan argued that granting the department’s Anti-Terrorist Division (ATD) even greater latitude was justified to protect public safety. So with the Police Commission poised to consider more sweeping changes, including a dubious proposal to relinquish much of its oversight authority to the ATD, there are hard questions about whether too much would be given away.

In its past efforts to combat terrorists, the LAPD gained an unfortunate but well-earned reputation for spying on law-abiding citizens. And this history must serve as a reminder to all police commissioners and the Riordan Administration of the trouble that can result from retreating from comprehensive public oversight. Accountability serves to protect the public as well as the ATD’s reputation. Indeed, a decade of oversight has helped to ease some of the fears and suspicions surrounding the LAPD’s undercover work.

Good as that may be, it does not erase what has happened. The infamous Red Squad in the 1930s comes to mind. So does the unseemly political spying scandal in which politicians, judges and critics of the department became investigative targets of the ATD’s previous incarnation, the Public Disorder Intelligence Division (PDID).

The settlement of a 1983 lawsuit against the PDID helped create the current guidelines the LAPD would now like to alter. In a wish list for the commission, the LAPD requested changes to regain authority to mount investigations against individuals or groups who advocate criminal conduct, even in the absence of evidence that they are breaking the law or are planning to do so.

Other specific changes would allow undercover undercover officers to infiltrate religious events or educational institutions, gather information on individuals who participate in civil disobedience and share information with other law enforcement agencies.

The Police Commission is charged with policing the police. Keeping that in mind, commissioners must maintain a strong measure of civilian oversight or risk losing a valuable measure of credibility. We think many of the current LAPD requests go too far and would return the city to treacherous waters.