This is one of the key findings from a study into serious integrity violations within four law enforcement organisations – the police, Dutch Customs, the Royal Netherlands Military Constabulary and the Netherlands Fiscal Intelligence and Investigation Service (FIOD) – that can be linked to organised crime.

The study was prompted by a number of high-profile cases in which confidential information relating to investigations was made available to criminals by members of the police force and customs officers were involved in drug trafficking and corruption. The study into the nature, seriousness and extent of the violations within law enforcement organisations related to organised crime was one of the measures that the Minister of Safety and Justice promised to the House of Representatives in late 2015.

Number of reports and integrity violations

For the study, all reports of possible integrity violations involving members of the police force, Dutch Customs, the Netherlands Fiscal Intelligence and Investigation Service and the Royal Netherlands Military Constabulary between 2012 and 2016 were analysed. This analysis identified 256 reports of serious integrity violations related to organised crime. Most of them pertained to members of the police force, which is largely explained by the much higher number of employees that the police has in comparison with the other law enforcement organisations. A second reason is the nature of the work and the fact that members of the police force tend to work on the street and in the immediate vicinity of criminals, more so than employees of the other organisations. These circumstances increase the chances of criminals trying to recruit them to their own ends.  

In 80 out of these 256 cases, the investigation that was opened in response to the report led to the conclusion that both an integrity violation and an inappropriate relationship with organised crime had taken place. Where the police and the Royal Netherlands Military Constabulary were concerned, these were mainly violations of professional secrecy and unwarranted contacts with criminals (in some cases both). The investigations at Netherlands Customs largely pertained to other kinds of integrity violations, such as facilitating organised crime (in particular by aiding and abetting the circumvention of customs inspections). Only a very small number of Netherlands Fiscal Intelligence and Investigation Service employees came up in the investigation.

A closer study into the types of cases in which integrity violations were found to have taken place confirms that organised crime as it exists in the Netherlands has become more serious in the past five years in several respects. In addition to the use of violence and the apparent ease with which killings are taking place in criminal circles, there is mounting pressure on law enforcement in the form of provocation, intimidation and the corruption of law enforcement officers.

Several background characteristics of the officials involved in integrity violations

Within the police force, it is mainly members of the regular units who are involved in integrity violations. Police officers responsible for basic law enforcement services are supposed to be the ‘eyes and ears’ of the neighbourhood and maintain close ties with the local population, but in some places they also see how organised crime takes over ‘their’ area. They have to keep a close eye on local issues, but at the same time keep their distance from people who are heavily involved in criminal activities. This study reveals that this is a balancing act that not everyone is able to pull off.

In line with the results of previous research, this study reveals that officials with immigrant backgrounds – measured by their share of the total workforce – are overrepresented in the group of law enforcement officers who were found to have both committed integrity violations and maintained a relationship with organised crime. This finding relates to a number of factors. Given the relatively high level of involvement of some ethnic groups in crime (including organised crime), the chances of a law enforcement officer with an immigrant background knowing someone from criminal circles in their large network of friends and family are higher than among native Dutch officials. The research also shows that family ties and friendships sometimes result in links between criminal networks and the world of surveillance and investigation. This puts the officials in a bind. They cannot break their loyalty to their friends and family, but at the same time, they are supposed to be setting an example in a law enforcement organisation that is seeking to increase diversity in its workforce.

Weaknesses and points for improvement

The employees of law enforcement organisations often have access to various data and registration systems on their company phones. This makes it considerably easier for them to consult these systems outside working hours. In the context of flexible working, employees sometimes exhibit a certain degree of naivety where social media and sensitive information are concerned. The criminal element sometimes takes advantage of this.

Regarding authorisations, a lot of changes were implemented following the controversial Mark M. case. However, there is still room for improvement. The study suggests various ways to eliminate weaknesses in the security surrounding access to databases.

Another weakness that was flagged up within the police force concerns insufficient functional oversight by managers of their subordinates. The team managers of the regular units, who have to head up increasingly large groups of employees, cannot be expected to be sufficiently clued-in on how individual employees are doing. This means that employees who are vulnerable to external temptations and are at risk of becoming involved in corruption are not always identified in time.

The close-knit culture within law enforcement organisations has benefits and drawbacks. Loyalty and camaraderie are important values of this culture, and are necessary for officers to be able to trust in and rely on each other in difficult circumstances. The downside of these values is that employees sometimes go to extremes to protect each other. Although the reporting procedures for signs of integrity violation are fairly straightforward, they are not always used, especially in less serious cases. Furthermore, law enforcement organisations still have a long way to go when it comes to embedding the idea of holding colleagues to account about their behaviour into the company culture.

 This study was conducted by researchers from Maastricht University, the Open University and Avans University of Applied Sciences, under the supervision of Professor Hans Nelen and Professor Emile Kolthoff.

 Click here for a summary of the research report Organized crime and integrity violations within Law Enforcement Organizations​
 Text by Annelotte Huiskes