A Global Lethal Force Monitor: Comparative Opportunities and Challenges

• Author: Brian Rappert,Otto Adang,Jasper De Paepe,Abi Dymond,Marleen Easton,Thomas Probert
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/10887679221121146
• Published date: 01 February 2023
• Date: 01 February 2023
• Subject Matter: Special Issue Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/10887679221121146

Homicide Studies

2023, Vol. 27(1) 187 –203

© 2022 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/10887679221121146

journals.sagepub.com/home/hsx

Special Issue Article

A Global Lethal Force

Monitor: Comparative

Opportunities and Challenges

Brian Rappert1, Otto Adang2,5, Jasper De Paepe3,6,

Abi Dymond1, Marleen Easton3,7,

and Thomas Probert4

Abstract

Comparison across jurisdictions is one way of assessing the appropriateness of lethal

force resulting from the actions of law enforcement agencies. This article sets out

a vision for a global use of force monitor that can enable meaningful comparisons

between law enforcement agencies. It examines some of the opportunities and

challenges associated with developing such a monitor in relation to (i) the legal

frameworks in place governing use of lethal force; (ii) how official state agencies

record and respond to deaths; and (iii) the contexts for the use of lethal force.

Keywords

lethal force, law enforcement agencies, accountability, data, comparison

As illustrated by other contributions to this special issue, today various efforts are

underway to determine when, and how often, law enforcement officials (LEOs) use

force that leads to death. Despite promising local and national initiatives, however,

there has been little international comparative analysis to date.

This article examines some of the opportunities and challenges associated with

international comparisons between law enforcement agencies (LEAs) and aims to set

1University of Exeter, UK

2Police Academy of the Netherlands, The Netherlands

3Ghent University, Belgium

4University of Pretoria, South Africa

5University of Groningen, the Netherlands

6Leiden University, The Netherlands

7Queensland University of Technology (QUT) and The University of Queensland (UQ), Australia

Corresponding Author:

Professor Brian Rappert, Department of Sociology, Philosophy, and Anthropology, University of Exeter,

Exeter EX4 4RJ, UK.

Email: B.Rappert@exeter.ac.uk

1121146HSXXXX10.1177/10887679221121146Homicide StudiesRappert et al.

research-article2022

188 Homicide Studies 27(1)

out the case for, and possibilities around, a global lethal force monitor. After setting

out a general case for the potential of comparative force assessments in the second

section, we examine how a monitor could make meaningful comparisons related to: (i)

the legal rules in place governing LEAs use of lethal force (section 3); (ii) the policies

and practices in place in LEAs and other official state agencies for recording and

responding to deaths (section 4); and (iii) the contexts for the use of force (section 5).

This vision for what is needed derives in significant part from two pilot studies under-

taken by the authors across six jurisdictions (Belgium, England & Wales, France, the

Netherlands, Kenya, and South Africa) to assess the policies and practices designed to

ensure the accountability of LEAs vis-à-vis lethal force. The penultimate section sets

out further opportunities and challenges associated with the creation of a global moni-

tor. As such, while we draw on two previous reports Police Lethal Force and

Accountability: Monitoring Deaths in Western Europe (Rappert et al. 2021) and

Toward a Lethal Force Monitor (Gandhi et al. 2021) in Section 4, we extend these

publications by putting them in the context of other comparative work and setting out

a more comprehensive rationale for, and next steps toward, the creation of such a

monitor.

Lethal Force: Knowns and Unknowns

There are a range of initiatives at the national level to document and analyze lethal force

resulting from law enforcement agencies. While much of the academic work is concen-

trated on the United States of America (e.g., Arseniev-Koehler et al., 2021; Degue et al.,

2016; Delehanty et al., 2017; Jacobs & O’Brien, 1998; Jennings & Rubado, 2017;

Nicholson-Crotty et al., 2017; Shah, 2019; Shane, 2018; Taylor, 2020; Zimring, 2020),

civil society organizations, community groups, concerned citizens and others are work-

ing in a variety of countries to document deaths and enhance police accountability fol-

lowing the use of lethal force (e.g., see Authors; Knoetze, 2022; The Nation, 2021).

There have also been attempts to compare official statistics with unofficial data (e.g.,

media reports), and to facilitate the collection of the latter (see Nguyen & Nguyen, 2018;

Ozkan et al., 2018). Broader research has also been conducted on the differences in, and

predictors of, the type, degree, and proportionality of force used by officers (Alpert &

Dunham, 1997; Chaney & Robertson, 2013; Klockars, 1995; Kuin et al., 2020; McCarthy

et al., 2021; McCluskey et al., 2005; Miller, 1998; Noppe, 2019; Stanley, 2004; Terrill &

Mastrofski, 2002; Terrill & Reisig, 2003; Timmer & Visser, 2015; Worden, 1995), and

officer views on use of force (Noppe & Verhage, 2017; Phillips, 2010). However, these

strands of work have not always looked explicitly at lethal force per se and have again

tended to be national in remit with an emphasis on the USA.

With a few notable exceptions (including Chevigny, 1990; Flores et al., 2021; Osse

& Cano, 2017), there are relatively few efforts to look at such issues internationally,

and to compare trends and practices across countries. This is, perhaps, surprising as

efforts have been made to monitor civilian deaths within and across armed conflicts

(see, e.g., www.everycasuality.org) as well as deaths worldwide from violence (see,

e.g., https://grevd.org) as part of efforts to track progress toward the Sustainable