|
Regulation in Other Countries
Most countries have legislation to regulate private security. A notable exception is the United Kingdom where past governments left the regulation of the private security industry to market forces. The Labour Party government, however, has indicated that this may change.
Furthermore, the extent of regulation is usually influenced by the political culture of the country in which the legislation is promulgated. The United Kingdom serves once more as an example, where the previous conservative government opted to leave regulation to the market, but introduced it in Northern Ireland to prevent the industry from becoming a home for political militants there.51
The regulation of private security can follow one of three models:
- Non-interventionist: The state does not take responsibility for regulating the industry. It is left to the market to ensure adequate regulation occurs.
- Minimal regulation: The state introduces minimal legislation to regulate the people who work in the industry. Such regulation may also set limited rules and standards for the industry.
- Comprehensive regulation: The state extends regulation beyond controlling the type of person who enters the industry. Substantive regulation is introduced to raise the standard and quality of services provided by the private security industry.52
In the late 1970s and during the 1980s, most countries moved away from the non-interventionist model to minimal regulation. In the 1990s, a growing number of countries moved from a minimal to a more comprehensive regulatory dispensation. Western Europe, parts of Australia, and some states in the US have introduced, or are considering the introduction of, more comprehensive regulation.53
The manner in which the regulation of the private security industry is administered, varies from country to country. For example:
- In Italy, the Ministry for the Interior draws up regulations that are administered by department prefects with the assistance of the police.54
- A board is set up with the overall authority of regulating the industry (as is the case in South Africa), or advisory boards are established to advise regulators.
- Police departments administer the regulations, as is the case in some parts of the US and Europe.
- Responsibility is divided with government departments regulating different components of the private security industry. In North Carolina (US), the Private Protective Services Board of the Department of Justice regulates the guarding and private investigation components, while the Alarm Systems Licensing Board regulates alarm installations.
Most private security company owners, particularly those owning larger companies, favour the minimal regulatory model. Minimal legislation entails limited protection for the public, but protects larger companies against fly-by-night operators and smaller companies, some of whom cannot afford the cost that a minimal regulatory model will incur.
|
|
|
