Guardians of Order or Mirrors of Power? (1)

Across the archipelago, the phrase “Tot Tot Wuk Wuk” has become a sonic symbol of public frustration. It mimics the shrill sirens and flashing strobes of government convoys that barrel down the roads, demanding that ordinary citizens yield—regardless of urgency or necessity. What was once reserved for emergencies now feels like a daily parade of privilege.

Citizens from Sabang, Jakarta, Jayapura, to Merauke have voiced their discontent. The sirens are not merely loud; they’re emotionally jarring. Many describe them as stress-inducing, a kind of auditory assault that disrupts both peace and patience. But beyond the noise lies a deeper grievance: the misuse of state resources. These convoys often appear to serve personal convenience rather than public duty, turning the streets into a theatre of entitlement.

There’s a bitter irony in all this. In a democracy, the people are meant to be the bosses. Yet on the roads, it’s the citizens who are ordered to step aside, as if their time and dignity are expendable. This contradiction has sparked a wave of digital protest—memes, satirical videos, and viral slogans like “Stop Tot Tot Wuk Wuk” have flooded social media, transforming frustration into creative resistance.

Imagine, for a moment, an ancient Mesopotamian street bustling with traders, donkeys, and the occasional runaway chicken. A guard, clad in a leather tunic far less intimidating than a modern police uniform, waves a clay tablet at a bewildered merchant and shouts something that roughly translates to: “You! Stop selling your fish before sunrise!” The merchant grumbles, the chicken escapes, and the guard sighs — probably thinking, “Law enforcement has always been a messy business.”

Though this scene sounds like the opening of a historical comedy, scholars such as Alan Wright (2002) remind us that it isn’t far from reality. In his book Policing: An Introduction to Concepts and Practice, Wright explains that even in early civilisations like Mesopotamia and Egypt, rudimentary forms of law enforcement existed — temple guards, market overseers, and night watchers who maintained order in their own clumsy but necessary ways.

Wright explains that “modern policing” emerged in response to the problem of maintaining social order, especially when older, informal arrangements (such as parish constables, night‐watchmen, private or semi‐private enforcement, etc.) were no longer sufficient for rapidly changing societies. It is implied that modern policing, in its recognisable form, is a phenomenon that developed in the 19th century in Britain (and then spreading elsewhere), especially with the establishment of formal police forces under state authority to enforce laws, maintain public order, prevent crime, and provide a set of “services” beyond simply catching criminals.

Wright argues that policing involves more than “law enforcement”. The job of modern police includes maintaining order (keeping the peace), preventing crime, providing services to the public, dealing with disputes, intervening in emergencies, and more broadly, mediating between society and the state. Its functions are both coercive (arrest, detention, use of force in certain circumstances) and facilitative (service, assistance, prevention) rooted in legitimacy. 

Wright explores the intricate relationship between policing and the maintenance of social order. He posits that modern policing emerged as a state response to the challenges of sustaining public order in increasingly complex societies. This evolution reflects a shift from informal, community-based methods to formalised, state-controlled mechanisms aimed at preventing and responding to disorder.

Wright highlights that societies expect police forces to manage various forms of public disorder, including dissent, protests, and riots, in ways that uphold the rule of law while balancing civil liberties. The police are tasked not only with enforcing laws but also with maintaining public confidence through fair and transparent practices. The legitimacy of police actions is crucial; when communities perceive the police as legitimate, they are more likely to cooperate and comply with the law. Conversely, perceived illegitimacy can lead to mistrust and diminished effectiveness.

Furthermore, Wright examines how police relationships with different social groups, particularly the working classes and marginalised communities, influence perceptions of legitimacy, trust, and conflict. Historical and contemporary tensions often arise when these communities feel disproportionately targeted or underrepresented in policing practices. Such dynamics can exacerbate conflicts and hinder the establishment of trust between the police and the public. Therefore, understanding and addressing these relationships is essential for fostering a policing model that is both effective and equitable.

Wright discusses the criminological critique of police work as a way to critically examine the role and function of policing within modern societies. He explains that while the police play a vital role in maintaining social order, criminologists have highlighted concerns about how policing can sometimes reinforce existing power structures rather than impartially protect all citizens. Critics argue that police may act to preserve the status quo, disproportionately targeting marginalised or working-class communities, and that an exclusive focus on law enforcement can overlook the broader social and economic contexts that contribute to criminal behaviour. Wright emphasises that these critiques encourage a more holistic and context-sensitive approach to policing, one that considers social dynamics, economic conditions, and the importance of fostering trustful relationships between police and the communities they serve. Ultimately, the criminological critique challenges the profession to balance authority with fairness, legitimacy, and social understanding.

Wright argues that the term 'policing' encompasses a diverse range of activities beyond the actions of public police forces, extending to various agencies, groups, and individuals involved in maintaining social order. Wright introduces the idea that policing functions can be categorised into four primary modes: peacekeeping, crime investigation, risk management, and community justice. These modes represent distinct approaches to policing, each with its own objectives and methodologies. Wright's analysis encourages a broader understanding of policing, recognising its complexity and the interplay between different actors and functions within society.

According to Wright, the police are constantly engaged in a delicate balancing act between protecting individual liberty and preserving social order. Wright explains that this tension lies at the very heart of modern policing — on one hand, democratic societies expect the police to safeguard freedom of expression, movement, and protest; yet, on the other hand, they also demand that police prevent chaos, violence, or social breakdown. This dual expectation creates a permanent dilemma: too much control leads to authoritarianism, but too little control risks disorder. Effective policing, Wright argues, depends on maintaining legitimacy through measured and proportionate action — the use of authority must always appear justified, reasonable, and responsive to public consent.

Wright also notes that when jurisdictions perceive that social order is under threat — such as during riots, terrorism scares, or large-scale protests — they often adopt more militarised or force-oriented methods. This shift might include deploying riot gear, tactical units, or surveillance technologies that resemble military strategies. While these measures are intended to restore order, Wright warns that they can also erode public trust and heighten tensions if used excessively or without transparency. In essence, he suggests that policing strategies should reflect the political and cultural values of a society: where legitimacy and accountability are prioritised, coercive power remains under tight control; but where fear and instability dominate, policing tends to become more repressive and militarised.

Wright explores the delicate craft of order maintenance, which he defines as the continual effort of the police to sustain social harmony without suffocating individual liberty. Wright argues that policing is not simply about enforcing the law, but about managing the tensions and negotiations that arise in public life. He emphasises that effective peacekeeping depends on restraint — on understanding the limits of coercion. When police use force beyond necessity, they risk undermining the very legitimacy upon which their authority rests. Thus, coercion must always be proportionate, publicly justifiable, and exercised within clear ethical boundaries.

Wright further notes that the norms and strategies of peacekeeping vary according to political culture. In liberal democracies, the emphasis tends to fall on consent, dialogue, and community trust, whereas more authoritarian regimes may favour control, surveillance, and the visible threat of coercion. These differences, Wright suggests, reflect deeper political and cultural values: societies that value pluralism and participation encourage police to act as facilitators of order, while societies anxious about instability often push their police toward militarisation and suppression. Ultimately, Wright portrays peacekeeping as a mirror of a nation’s character — a reflection of how it reconciles freedom with fear, and authority with justice.

Wright turns his attention from order-keeping to the realm of crime investigation, exploring how police investigate, detect, and respond to crime, and how the investigative mode of policing brings its own challenges. Wright discusses how the investigative culture within British policing has evolved, highlighting both reactive and proactive models of investigation; reactive investigations are those that respond to crimes after they’ve occurred, whereas proactive investigation seeks to prevent crime or to intervene earlier. He analyses differences in policing high-volume, routine crimes versus serious or organised crime, illustrating how approaches shift depending on resources, priorities, and threat perceptions.

Wright is critical of the “crime-fighter” myth—the idea that policing is mainly about catching criminals—arguing that in practice this narrative overemphasises detection and dramatic investigations, often at the expense of prevention, due process, or dealing with less visible harms. He considers how police act as gatekeepers of the criminal justice system, deciding what cases get pursued, where to allocate effort, and how investigative practices are shaped by institutional culture, law, public expectations, and resource constraints. Even though there have been pushes toward making investigations more professional, scientific, or adhering to due process norms, Wright asserts that many of the traditional practices and expectations resist full change.

Wright delves into the concept of risk management as a mode of policing. He examines how contemporary societies, often referred to as "risk societies," are increasingly preoccupied with the anticipation and mitigation of potential threats, ranging from terrorism and cybercrime to natural disasters and public health crises. Wright discusses how this pervasive focus on risk influences policing strategies, leading to a shift from reactive approaches to more proactive, preventative measures. He highlights the importance of partnerships between police and other agencies, as well as community involvement, in managing these risks effectively.

Wright also critiques the tendency to view policing solely through the lens of risk management, cautioning against the potential for overreach and the erosion of civil liberties. He emphasises the need for a balanced approach that considers the rights of individuals while addressing legitimate security concerns. The chapter underscores the evolving role of police in a complex, risk-aware society and the challenges they face in maintaining public safety without compromising democratic values.

Wright delves into the concept of community justice within the realm of policing, as well. He examines how this approach seeks to address justice not merely through the enforcement of laws but by fostering a deeper connection between the police and the communities they serve. Wright discusses the evolution of policing strategies, highlighting a shift from traditional, top-down models to more community-oriented approaches. This transformation reflects a broader societal recognition of the importance of community involvement in maintaining public order and ensuring justice.

Wright also explores the challenges and complexities associated with implementing community justice. He notes that while this model aims to be more inclusive and responsive to community needs, it requires significant changes in police culture and practices. The chapter underscores the necessity for police officers to build trust and collaborate with community members, acknowledging the diverse cultural dynamics that exist within different communities. Wright suggests that effective community justice involves not only addressing crime but also understanding and responding to the underlying social issues that contribute to criminal behaviour.

Wright presents community justice as a progressive approach to policing, one that seeks to balance the enforcement of laws with the promotion of social equity and community well-being. He advocates for a policing model that is adaptable, culturally sensitive, and deeply rooted in the values and needs of the community.

Wright delves into the politics of policing in the late modern era, critically examining the evolving role of police in contemporary society. He argues that policing is increasingly shaped by political agendas, economic considerations, and social dynamics, rather than solely by the principles of justice and public service. Wright highlights how political influences can affect police priorities, resource allocation, and operational strategies, often leading to a focus on certain types of crime or communities over others.

He also discusses the challenges of maintaining police legitimacy in a diverse and rapidly changing society. He notes that public trust in the police is contingent upon perceptions of fairness, accountability, and transparency. When police actions are perceived as politically motivated or biased, it can erode public confidence and hinder effective policing. The chapter underscores the importance of ensuring that policing practices align with democratic values and human rights, advocating for reforms that promote greater accountability and community involvement in policing decisions.

In conclusion, Wright posits that the future of policing depends on its ability to adapt to the complexities of modern society while upholding the principles of justice and equity. He calls for a reimagining of policing that moves beyond traditional models of control and enforcement, towards approaches that are more inclusive, transparent, and responsive to the needs of all communities. This vision entails a shift towards policing that is not only effective but also just and legitimate in the eyes of the public.

The central message of Alan Wright’s Policing: An Introduction to Concepts and Practice is that policing is a complex, multifaceted institution that cannot be understood simply as the enforcement of laws. Wright emphasises that the role of the police extends beyond catching criminals or maintaining order; it encompasses peacekeeping, crime investigation, risk management, and community justice, all of which are influenced by social, political, and cultural contexts. He stresses that effective policing requires balancing coercive power with legitimacy, ensuring that actions are proportionate, accountable, and aligned with the values of the communities served. Ultimately, Wright conveys that the future of policing depends on adaptability, ethical responsibility, and meaningful engagement with society, highlighting that policing is as much about cultivating trust and social cohesion as it is about maintaining law and order.

By the time we reach medieval Europe, the concept of policing began to take shape as Clive Emsley (1996) notes in The English Police: A Political and Social History. Communities appointed constables and watchmen — unpaid citizens responsible for ringing bells, chasing thieves, and shouting warnings into the dark. These early officers were less Sherlock Holmes and more “neighbourhood dads with torches.”

Then came Sir Robert Peel, the British Home Secretary who, in 1829, formally established the Metropolitan Police Service in London. His Principles of Law Enforcement marked a turning point, suggesting that policing should serve public consent rather than fear — a moral philosophy that distinguished “the police as citizens in uniform” rather than as soldiers of the state.

As Charles Reith (1956) later summarised in A Short History of the British Police, the essence of policing — whether in ancient Babylon or modern Jakarta — has always been the same: protecting people, enforcing norms, and maintaining peace. The methods may have evolved from clay tablets to digital databases, but the purpose remains timeless.

The establishment of a police force in any country is, at its core, a philosophical and practical response to the dual human needs for security and social order. Philosophically, the police exist to mediate the delicate balance between individual liberty and collective safety. They embody the social contract theorised by thinkers like Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, where citizens agree to cede certain freedoms in exchange for protection and the predictable enforcement of law. Without such an institution, societies risk descending into disorder, where the strong dominate the weak and chaos replaces justice.

Policing also serves as a tangible manifestation of the state’s authority. According to Herbert L. Packer (1968) in The Limits of the Criminal Sanction, the police operate at the intersection of law and morality: they are instruments of state power, yet ideally constrained by ethical norms and democratic oversight. The purpose is not merely to punish, but to prevent harm, maintain public trust, and provide a sense of predictability and stability. Without a credible police presence, the social contract itself becomes fragile, and citizens’ faith in justice and fairness erodes.

Moreover, modern scholars like Peter K. Manning (2008) in The Technology of Policing argue that the police are simultaneously symbols and enforcers of collective values. They communicate to society which behaviours are unacceptable, how rights are protected, and what is expected from both citizens and state institutions. Philosophically, then, the police are not just about enforcement; they are about the embodiment of social order, ethical norms, and the reassurance that, in a structured society, wrongs will be addressed, and individuals can coexist with confidence in each other’s safety.

In sum, the police exist because every society faces tension: between freedom and order, between individual action and collective responsibility, and between justice and power. Their raison d’être is to mediate these tensions, transforming abstract laws and moral expectations into lived realities that allow citizens to live without constant fear of violence, theft, or exploitation.

So, as President Prabowo prepares his ambitious reform of Indonesia’s police force, perhaps the story that began with a tired Mesopotamian guard still echoes today — reminding us that every reform, at its heart, is an attempt to make order out of the chaos that has followed humanity since the dawn of cities.

[Part 2]

Bahasa