������Ƶ

If 2015 has been notable for one issue that has consistently dominated our public discourse and media coverage, that issue has been the conduct and oversight of police departments across America.

From the  in Baltimore to the outrage over the killing of 12-year-old to the in South Carolina, police have been exposed time and again exercising appallingly poor and often racist judgment that too often resulted in the death of black men and boys.

Were it not for mobile phone video cameras able to substantiate eyewitness claims, we might not even be aware of the unconscionable nature of many of the killings — incidents that may, in fact, be only the tip of the iceberg.

Whether their actions resulted directly in unnecessary deaths or in less horrible outcomes, too often, police officers have escaped discipline, charges and public accountability. Examples of that here in Hawaii include a severe beating with a baton that Officer Ming Wang gave a man late last year for harassing a monk seal. That matter only recently has been taken back up by the county prosecutor’s office, after it first declined to pursue charges against the officer.

But in another matter, Sgt. Darren Cachola continues to face no public accountability despite having been caught on video repeatedly punching his girlfriend inside a Waipahu restaurant. The case outraged state legislators, particularly the Women’s Caucus, but to no avail. Earlier this fall, that police officials wanted to fire Cachola and demote his supervising officer, but there’s been no further word on whether those penalties were actually implemented.

Though none of the cases in Hawaii have inflamed community feelings in the way that has happened in other states, there’s no doubt that our law enforcement community and the public it polices would benefit from raising the state’s standards of professionalism, consistency, transparency and accountability in the employment and oversight of law enforcement officers.

Unfortunately, such measures almost always have been successfully opposed by the State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers, a union with considerable influence at the State Capitol. Last session, SHOPO-opposed bills fell, one after another, in the Senate Judiciary Committee. It is chaired by the only sitting senator endorsed by SHOPO, Sen. Gil Keith-Agaran of Maui, a Berkeley-educated attorney.

In a legislative system that places considerable power and discretion in the hands of committee chairs, Keith-Agaran sometimes simply refused to hear bills, deferred them or steered them to defeat.

But as he did last year and in years past, Senate Vice President Will Espero is promoting law enforcement reform; only this year, he’s approaching the measures as a package and seeking to mobilize a coalition of supporters behind them.

Espero met with the Civil Beat Editorial Board on Monday to outline the measures he plans to introduce this year. These include four that we strongly believe could fundamentally improve law enforcement throughout Hawaii.

Four Measures For Meaningful Reform

A Training and Standards Board. Hawaii continues to be the nation’s only state without state-certified standards for police officers, and one of six that lacks a license-revocation process for officers found guilty of wrongdoing or who otherwise fail to meet standards. Like , introduced by Espero last year, the legislation being prepared for 2016 would establish a board that would focus on minimum hiring standards for county, state and harbor police, but without the certification/decertification requirements called for last year.

If only one reform measure were to pass in 2016, we would advocate that it be this one, even though Espero has disappointingly watered it down by removing the certification/decertification clause — a requirement that must be built back in. Still, even as outlined Monday, it stands to have the greatest impact of the measures in creating a new environment of enhanced law enforcement professionalism around the state.

As Espero says, news of officers accused of misconduct or other infractions in Hawaii has been “too common” over the past year, and ensuring consistency of quality in hiring and in basic training is essential to reversing that trend.

This is one of the measures, by the way, that Keith-Agaran allowed to die through lack of a hearing in the 2015 session.

An Independent Review Board. Hawaii also is the only state that lacks an independent board to review police shootings and in-custody deaths. Here, any such review is done by internal investigators or county prosecutors, who may be reluctant to confront police misconduct.

The lack of such a board was notable in the investigation of the death of Sheldon Haleck earlier this year. In that case, a troubled, 38-year-old veteran suffering from mental illness and a drug problem died after being repeatedly tased by Honolulu Police Department officers. A medical examiner ruled the death a homicide, and said the officers’ actions contributed to Haleck’s death; law enforcement experts said the officers involved didn’t follow proper protocol for Taser use.

The officers all faced internal investigations, but no outcomes have been announced, and none of the officers involved have faced any disciplinary action. Haleck’s family, meanwhile, is suing HPD in federal court for negligent use of force and an alleged cover-up surrounding his death.

To protect the rights of suspects and others who find themselves in law enforcement custody, and to protect the reputation of the law enforcement community, Hawaii needs an independent board that can substantiate allegations of misconduct or vindicate an officer who is wrongly accused. Internal reviews lack the same ring of credibility, no matter the facts of the case.

Representation on this board, as Espero outlined it, would include a retired judge, a prosecutor, a former prosecutor, a former law enforcement officer and college or university faculty member with expertise in criminal justice or law enforcement. That’s a good starting point; we would advocate including at least three positions for citizens not affiliated with the judicial or criminal justice systems or with academic study of those areas.

Funding for Body Cameras. Multiple measures to equip police throughout Hawaii with body cameras failed in 2015, to the great disappointment of many. Cameras, after all, can protect police against false allegations or abuse, and can document misconduct, making it easier to identify and deal with problem officers.

In the absence of state action, Kauai, Maui and Hawaii Island counties are moving ahead with pilot programs, testing cameras in the field and developing plans to move forward on implementation. In the case of Kauai, that means moving forward without the support of SHOPO, the president of which wants the right to sign off on the camera policy before it’s implemented. He is threatening to take the issue before the Hawaii Labor Relations Board.

Resolving this issue on a statewide basis would obviate the need for each county to battle SHOPO over specifics and would encourage greater accountability and transparency in Hawaii law enforcement.

Transparency: Identifying Officers in Misconduct Cases. The identities and disciplinary records of officers who are found guilty of serious misconduct — drunk driving, assault or lying to investigators, for instance — are protected under current interpretation of Hawaii law.

The Hawaii Supreme Court heard a challenge to that interpretation last summer by the Civil Beat Law Center, and a ruling in that matter hasn’t yet been made. The Legislature could clear the matter up entirely with legislation that would eliminate the exemption to the Uniform Information Practices Act passed 20 years ago — the legal means that counties use to keep identity and disciplinary records secret — and that would require the information to be included in an annual report to the Legislature.

Whether this happens through court ruling or legislative action, the public has a right to know when officers, who are entrusted with an extraordinary level of authority and firepower, act inappropriately. And the public is entitled to know exactly who such officers are — as is the practice in most other states.

These likely aren’t the only reform measures Civil Beat will support. As session gets underway and legislation surfaces around such ideas as giving county police commissions disciplinary authority over officers, you can count on us to weigh in.

But on matters that might make the most difference for law enforcement in Hawaii and the public it serves, we’d be well served with the four above as a starting point. As each issue moves forward, look to Civil Beat to provide deeper editorial analysis and regular legislative cover, as well as ways that citizens can be involved in working toward the law enforcement environment that our state deserves.