This is the concluding part of the article published penultimate Friday.

The inability of countries to modify community policing
remains one of the major obstacles militating against the successful practice of community policing. Moreso, there is usually the trap to adopt western idea of community policing. This tends to emphasise the top-down approach as opposed to communally oriented societies that favour bottom top approach as embedded within their cultural milieu in African countries.
Be that as it may, experts support the view that communities can no longer  stand in isolation from the Police, neither can they be seen as an addendum in policing, nor should the Police seek to retain their high levels of autonomy. Instead, constant and consistent communication should be shared between the two major stakeholders.
Extensive research has shown that involving local residents in the policing process beyond being the “eyes and ears” of the Police is beneficial as a tool of crime reduction and creating safer communities. Therefore, there is a strong theoretical case for community engagement  and involvement in Police.
However, in Nigeria, community involvement in the policing processes in local communities is limited to town hall meeting usually arising from some form of protest actions or due to some heinous crimes which were committed in the community, necessitating some dialogue often between the police/politician/residents or in terms of reporting incidents as victims/witnesses and providing covert information.
Involving communities in policing will be challenging for members of the Nigeria Police Force who have not been accustomed to working with communities. However, the effort will be worthwhile for at least five reasons.
One, services will be provided that meet communities wants and needs and will be appropriate.
Two, transparency can be promoted and communities provided with a better understanding of the complex decision-making in the policing process, thus leading to greater openness, accountability and confidence. Meanwhile, groups who were traditionally excluded or marginalized can be identified and appropriate plans made to work with these people. Again, communities can identify the wider determinants of crime and deviant behaviours and develop plans and frequently implement strategies to address inequalities.
Finally,  communities can be empowered and their capacity enhanced to promote self-control and self-confidence to address their needs through greater confidence in their ability to inform the direction of law enforcement services.
Based on prior research, there are certain principles that should underpin any community involvement in policing activity. These include, the necessity of understanding the community/communities in which policing is to be conducted; the need for partnership working and integration of participation at all stage of the process and the need for recognition of long term involvement; the need to understand that meaningful relationships take time to establish and that involvement becomes tokenistic if relationships are not maintained in the long-term and the need to build effective groups/structures that strengthen communities rather than divide them.
Others are the need for a range of wider (formal and informal) ways in which people can participate – creating some community ownership and control, the need for clarity and recognition of influence e.g. evidence that communities have been heard; the recognition that people participate from a variety of starting points and cultural experience and that this has implications for how people learn and contribute and the need to be flexible and responsive, leading to adaptations where necessary in project methods, time tables and outcomes.
Simply put, community involvement in policing refers to the amount of physical and psychological  energy that communities collectively devote to the policing experience. Thus, a highly involved community is one which, for example, devotes considerable energy to ensuring that the communities are safe, reports criminal activities to the relevant authorities (crime stoppers, Police etc.)  spends much time working with other residents to reduce crime, seeks to forge relationships with  the Police, attempts to create a safe and secure environment, using creative methods; participates actively in community organisations, and interacts frequently with the Police and other residents with the aim of devising plans and policies to alleviate crime and deviance.
Conversely, a typical uninvolved community, neglects the community, spends little time in  dealing with the community, abstains from communal activities, and has infrequent contact with the Police and other residents and displays a general apathetic behavior to the community and crime related issues.
Community policing has remained very potent in tackling crime management despite criticisms and challenges in its implementation. In the United States, it has been used extensively to create community safe zones to combat violent and drug related crimes with substantial success. Some Latin American countries such as Brazil and Mexico with serious drug related crimes have equally employed community policing and still continue to employ this strategy to fight crime. The South African Police Service has successfully integrated community policing in law enforcement and crime control. Counter insurgency efforts in Afghanistan equally employ some degree of community policing.
Indeed, many countries across the world have adopted community policing to manage crime with varying degrees of success and exponential prospects.
It must however, be noted that the problem of adapting community policing to suit specific environments has continued to remain a serious challenge in a number of countries, including Nigeria where existing status quo, institutional and bureaucratic complexities often frustrate effective community policing. More so, in Nigeria with interesting ethno-religious loyalties, community policing in urban areas of the country tends to face difficult challenge of a biased community. This explains some level of intelligence and security failures against the Niger Delta insurgents and lately against Boko Haram in Northern Nigeria.
The view that communities can no longer stand in isolation from the Police, neither can they be seen as an addendum in policing, nor should the Police seek to retain their high levels of autonomy is significantly valid. There is therefore the need for constant and consistent communication to be shared between the two major stakeholders.
Extensive research has shown that involving local residents in the policing process beyond being the “eyes and ears” of the Police is beneficial as a tool of crime reduction and creating safer communities. Therefore, there is a strong theoretical case for community engagement and involvement in policing. I want to support the notion that there must be a commitment to collaborative partnerships between law enforcement agencies and the individuals and organizations they serve. In the absence of the community  partnership, community policing will not keep pace with the needs of multi-ethnic diverse communities anywhere in the world and Nigeria in particular.
Nte is of the Novena University, Ogume, Delta State.

Ngboawaji Daniel Nte