Ultimately, the advocates of civilian review of police activities are on stronger legal and theoretical grounds than are the police who oppose civilian review. Legally, it is a tenet of the American political system that elected civilian officials hold authority over government organizations of any type. Thus, the elected president of the country is the commanderinchief of the national armed, uniformed military forces, and the civilian cabinet officer, the Attorney General, appointed by the elected president exercises a direct control over the national police, the Federal Bureau of Investigation. At the federal level, the Armed Forces committies of the Senate and the House of Representatives act as civilian review boards for the activities of the armed forces. Similarly, congressional oversight committees are formed for the stated purposes of reviewing certain activities of the Federal Bureau of Investigation from time to time.

Ultimately, at whatever level of government is involved, the citizens of the juristiction may demand accountability from their government bodies. That accountability may take many forms. The civilian review of police activities is one of thos

Nielsen, E. (1982, July). Police shooting incidents. Police Chief, 49, 4445.

Earle, H. H. (1983). Police recruit training, (rev. ed.). Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.

A civilian review board may provide the community with a means of exerting some degree of control over police actions. If handled ineptly, however, the civilian review board may also become a vehicle which causes effective policing to become an impossibility within an increasingly violent and dangerous society. Most importantly, a civilian review board must not be permitted to become simply a sounding board for those who oppose the police. In such instances, police are typically condemned for enforcing laws in minority communities (police harassment), and simultaneously condemned for permitting crime to exist within such communities (this level of crime would not be permitted in a white neighborhood is a typical charge).

An important change which is in the process of occurring in contemporary American public administration is a change in the way in which public administrators are held accountable for their actions. In the past, public administrators have often been able to circumvent the intent of elected officials through the ways in which they implemented programs (Grizzle, 1985). In the lastquarter of the twentieth century, public administrators are beginning to be held responsible by the public for program outcomes (Grizzle, 1985). The civilian review of police activities is a part of this process (Hensley, 1988).