ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the character of the relationship between politicians and police chiefs as they manage their respective obligations in governance. It identifies the protagonists–politicians and police. The chapter also examines national differences in the salience and content of disagreements about governance. It describes the ways in which politicians and chiefs conduct this uniquely democratic dance, distinguishing processes of disagreement by the way in which they are resolved. Politicians in both countries understand that any hint of interference in personnel decisions, criminal investigations, and daily operations would be regarded by the public as unacceptable. Accountability problems become visible most often when police have failed in some obvious way, such a failing to prevent a serious crime or overusing physical force, and the public wants to assign responsibility. For irreconcilable differences, the United States, India, and Australia; for political deference, Old Britain and Canada; for police deference, New Zealand and Australia; and for negotiated compromise, all six.
