What is missing to regulate the use of weapons by the Police? To the problems of legislation are added deficiencies in training

the cape of the police Santiago Olmedo was sentenced for shooting down two criminals in Riobamba; another agent, Marco Parra, is being investigated for the crime of homicide in Quito (he also shot an assailant); and a third, Daniel Laaz, lost his life in Guayaquil in a confrontation with two suspects. The three cases occurred between January 15 and 19 of this year and reignited the debate on the progressive use of force by law enforcement officers.

The discussion is updated and recycled, permanently. It happened in October 2021, after an 11 year old boy died during a crossfire between a police officer and a criminal in an ice cream parlor in Guayaquil; in January 2019, in Ibarra, after the assassination of Diana Ramirez, at the hands of her ex-partner in front of a group of police officers who did not know how to react; or in August 2018, when he died Andrés Padilla for a shot by a uniformed officer, in the middle of a confusing incident in Mask, Imbabura.

Citizens, lawyers, politicians, analysts, police officers on passive duty and, today, Even President Guillermo Lasso have expressed their opinions and have commented for and against the procedures to be followed by uniformed personnel in special circumstances. But nevertheless, no consensus yet about the legal changes to be executed.

What led the judges to convict the policeman Santiago Olmedo? The Prosecutor’s Office indicates that he was shot more than a dozen times, the corporal refutes arguments

Legislation in force, without consensus

In the country, the progressive use of force is regulated in some regulations, starting with the Constitution, which in the second paragraph of article 163 states that “the members of the National Police will have training based on human rights, specialized investigation, prevention, control and prevention of crime and the use of means of dissuasion and conciliation as alternatives to the use of force”.

From this constitutional basis follows various legal bodies related:

Integral Penal Organic Code (COIP). In the last reform to the COIP, published in the Official Registry in December 2019, article 30.1 was incorporated, which refers to the fulfillment of legal duty of the servers of the National Police and prison security.

In short, it implies that the police or prison security agent has complied with their legal duty when “in protection of one’s own or another’s right, cause injury, damage or death to another person”.

In order for these actions to be considered within the framework of the COIP, they must meet three requirements:

1. to be done in acts of service or as a consequence thereof;
2. Let him observe progressive, proportional use and rational force; Y,
3. What exists threat or risk imminent to the life of third parties or their own or to protect a legal interest.

Regulation of legal, adequate and proportional use of force for the national police of Ecuador. Published in 2014 in Ministerial Agreement 4472, it addresses the training of police officers in the use of force.

The police servers, the regulation says, “must be trained, updated and evaluated permanently in criminal legislation, verbalization, adequate use of force and the use of non-lethal and lethal incapacitating weapons of police equipment, as well as in self-protection equipment.

The training will be periodic in national and international legislation, criminal procedure, human rights, use and handling of weapons non-lethal and lethal police personnel, arrest and immobilization techniques, proper use of force, peaceful conflict resolution, among other aspects.

Apart from the Constitution, the COIP and the Regulations, the use of force is also stated in the Code of Citizen Security and Public Order Entities (Coescop), and in the Regulations for the carrying and use of weapons, technologies and non-lethal ammunition.

Ambiguity

For the lawyer Edwin Romero, who has practiced the legal defense of police officers, There are ambiguities in the current regulations. “One thing is the theory they receive in their training and another is what happens in reality,” he says.

In his opinion, Corporal Olmedo’s sentence conveys a unfavorable message for the uniformed men who are facing a flagrant crime.

In this sense, Romero suggested that in the Assembly Article 30 of COIP is clarified, in the part that states that “there is no criminal offense when acting in compliance with a legitimate and express order of a competent authority or a legal duty, duly verified.”

‘We feel defenseless at the legal level,’ says Santiago Olmedo, a policeman sentenced for shooting down two alleged criminals

One of the cases represented by the lawyer is that of a agent being prosecuted for shooting a person who threatened to kill him. “The man made body movements and told the police: ‘if you move, I’ll kill you’. (Subject) put his hand to his groin, as if he was going to shoot. The policeman had to draw his gun and neutralize him. What if that man did have a firearm? For this reason, legislators should analyze the causes of exclusion (from article 30 of the COIP)”, Romero affirms.

bills

The National Assembly has in its hands four bills that address security and the progressive use of force, three are legislative initiatives and another is the proposal presented by the government of William Lasso, on January 25 last.

The ex-members Cesar Litardo (AP), César Solórzano (PSP) and the current legislator Marcela Holguín (UNES) promoted regulations from the parliament.

In the Sovereignty Commission These three projects are analyzed and it is expected to add the law proposed by the current Government, once the Legislative Administration Council (CAL) meets, qualifies and assigns it.

Given that the legal proposals address similar issues, and in order to facilitate the process, the legislative table decided unify all bills.

National Assembly will unify four projects to regulate the progressive use of force

Lasso’s initiative is called Organic Law on Comprehensive Security and Strengthening of the Public Force. It has 46 articles in seven titles.

Here the progressive use of force is defined as follows: “It is the use of physical force by police officers, military officers or the Security and Penitentiary Surveillance Corps to fulfill their constitutional and legal mission of protecting rights and freedoms.”

The first title of the initiative establishes the rules that regulate the progressive use of force. It covers aspects of legitimacy, principles, levels, threat situations, and investigations after the use of force.

Five levels are contemplated: presence, verbalization, physical control, non-lethal defensive techniques and force with lethal potential.

Government insists to the Assembly that the reforms on the progressive use of force are emerging

Regarding the use of force in the face of threats, it is pointed out that “in life-threatening situations of third parties or of the public force’s own servant”, the uniformed officer may use force “at the level that is reasonable and necessary to neutralize the threat, including force with lethal potential”.

The Minister of Government, Alexandra Vela, has asked the Assembly that the project is processed quickly, as if it were an urgent law in economic matters, that is, that it be processed in 30 days.

deficiency in practice

Although there are legal parameters that regulate the progressive use of force in the country, the training and qualification that agents receive in this matter “is deficient” says Luis Martínez, a passive police officer with a 30-year career, who is a spokesman for the Front for the Protection of Human Rights of Police Members.

He maintains that it is necessary create a more specific legal body for police actions and that the intention to regulate the progressive use of force was reflected in the 2008 Constitution, rather, in order to curb police action.

“One thing is what is written in the law and another what happens in the field. Since (the agents) arrive to take the procedure, they are in danger. The logical thing is to safeguard your life and that of the people who are on the site. There is poor training regarding the progressive use of force and actions, in general. No government has invested in citizen security, but they have taken the National Police as an attached office to carry out functions according to their ideology, that has been done by all”, affirms Martínez.

He adds that the problem of training is very complex and contradictory, even beyond the lack of resources and logistics. He cited, for example, that many uniformed personnel who go abroad to train return to the country to perform functions other than those of their specialization.

The processes against the gendarmes have also generated uncertainty, Martínez mentions, for what he believes is due “re-institutionalize the National Police and re-create the sanction courts for policemen”.

From the side of those who propose more limitations on police action, Luis Saavedra, executive coordinator of the Inredh human rights foundation, maintains that after speaking with police officers of different ranks and places Serious training flaws have been identified.

“I have talked to many police officers and I have asked them this question: what is the training they have to know how and where to shoot? They answer that the training is theoretical, that they are given the regulations, they are told what is in the law, but none have had target practice. It is one thing to know the rules by heart and another to know how to shoot. If they’re not practiced, how can we tell them to shoot the leg or the arms first? If they don’t know how to shoot, they end up shooting as they please; this is the problem of the policeman (Santiago) Olmedo, what we believe is that he was not prepared for that,” Saavedra said.

Hence, Inredh suggests that the judges establish in their rulings the obligation of shooting practice training. “I am convinced that the police do not go out to kill, but if he doesn’t know how to shoot, he ends up killingSaavedra said.

EL UNIVERSO requested an interview with the Directorate of Education of the National Police, on January 20, to address the instruction given in the use of force. However, as of press time there was no response. (I)