Crime and security

 Crime and Security

This course covers fundamental issues, Crime and security policies, typologies and historical perspectives of security. This course also highlights the understanding of how security threats are defined and addressed; how something becomes a "security" problem; i.e. securitization. It helps to understand the dynamics by which actors prioritize security threats.

Course Outline:

Introduction:

1. Perspective of Crime

i) Meaning and definition of Crime

'Crime' is an antisocial, immoral, or sinful behavior. However, according to the legal definition, 'Crime' is any form of conduct that is declared to be socially harmful in a State and as such forbidden by law under the pain of some punishment.

Crime is “an intentional act or omission in violation of criminal law …, committed without defense or justification, and sanctioned by the state as a felony or misdemeanor.

Cohen and Felson originally proposed the theory in a famous 1979 article. Marcus Felson has gone on to develop it more clearly and extensively in a book now in its third edition (Felson 1994, 1998, 2002). The theory can be summarised as: “A crime occurs when a suitable target and a potential offender meet at a suitable time and place lacking capable guardianship.”

Crime, the intentional commission of an act usually deemed socially harmful or dangerous and specifically defined, prohibited, and punishable under criminal law.

Possible punishments determine the differences between misdemeanors and felonies. Misdemeanors are non-serious, minor crimes that the government punishes by confinement in a local jail for a year or less. Examples include petty theft, simple assault, disorderly conduct, and disturbing the peace. Felonies are serious crimes that the government punishes by death or incarceration in a prison for at least a year. This group includes such crimes as murder, rape, robbery, and burglary.

ii) History of Crime and Punishment

In some ancient cultures, law breakers were put to death by stoning, crucifixion (a method of capital punishment in which the victim is tied or nailed to a large wooden cross or beam and left to hang until eventual death from exhaustion and asphyxiation), being burned at the stake (Execution by fire), and even slowly being crushed by elephants. Later societies found these methods to be cruel and unusual forms of punishment and sought out more humane practices.

Hammurabi and the Laws of Retribution

Hammurabi was a Babylonian king who ruled from 1792 until 1750 B.C.E. The Code of Hammurabi was a set of legal precedents for different types of crimes and disputes, ranging from family law to contracts and major crimes — this is one of the earliest examples of the "innocent until proven guilty" adage that we still follow today.

The Code of Hammurabi included specific punishments based on the criminal's age, social class and gender. For example, if a rich man was found guilty of stealing, he would be charged a higher fine than if a slave was found guilty of stealing. Alternately, the punishment for killing a rich person would be far more severe than for killing a slave.

Plato and Aristotle

Early philosophers play a major role in how we look at crime and punishment today. They also help us understand why crime and punishment are important. They helped humanity understand that the reason for committing a crime can have an impact on how severe a punishment should be.

Plato and Aristotle, in particular, are responsible for our understanding of the relationship between crime and punishment today. These two philosophers helped us understand why it's equally important to uncover why a person commits a crime as it is to ensure others don't commit the same crime. They also pointed out that the two are often closely related, as well:

• Plato: Plato claimed that a major reason why people commit crimes was because of a lack of education and wealth. People who lived in poverty and who were uneducated — probably because they couldn't afford to get an education — were more likely to commit crimes, often just to survive. Plato believed that crimes should be punished, of course, but the punishment should reflect the degree of fault rather than the severity of the crime. For example, if a man was caught stealing bread to feed his starving family, he should receive a lesser punishment than a man who steals bread for himself.

• Aristotle: Meanwhile, Aristotle was explaining that punishments and responses to crime should be used as an opportunity to prevent others from committing crimes. He believed that when criminals receive punishment, it should be severe enough that it warns the rest of society to not commit the same crime while also reminding the criminal to not commit a crime again.

Roman law and Secularism

The Romans were the first people to look at crime and punishment as purely human traits. Historical crime and punishment commonly claimed that punishing a criminal was "doing God's work" and that committing a crime was the same as sinning.

But the Romans saw crime as an insult to society as a whole, and Roman law was established to bring order to society. Roman law was less concerned with pleasing religious deities and more concerned with ensuring society was safe, orderly, and fair.

Many of the basics of Roman law are still practiced in modern civil law and criminal justice in the 21st century.

Middle Ages and Christianity

The evolution of crime and punishment took a few steps backward in the middle Ages when the rise of Christianity made it closely linked to religion again. This meant, once again, crimes were considered to be acts against God, and punishments for these crimes were God's work.

The punishments for crime were still cruel, severe, and often inhumane because they were designed to rid the criminal of the devil's influence. Historical crime and punishment were violent and gory, including a type of punishment designated for situations in which a person's guilt was unclear.

In a "trial by ordeal," a person would be put into a life-threatening situation, and their survival would reveal whether they were guilty or innocent.

• St. Thomas Aquinas

It wasn't until St. Thomas Aquinas wrote his "Summa Theologica," a treatise on law, crime and punishment, that the history of punishment started turning towards secularism. Aquinas explained that there was a God-given "natural law" that existed and that humans were naturally designed to do good.

When a human committed a crime, Aquinas believed it was both an affront to God as well as society. He claimed that crimes negatively impacted both the victims and the criminals. The victim was negatively impacted because they were the victim of a crime, but the criminal was to be pitied because, by committing a crime, they were moving further away from God and losing their humanity.

It was Aquinas and his compassionate take on punishments that helped create modern laws.

• Cesare Beccaria and Secularism

Secularism has popped up and disappeared several times throughout the history of crime and punishment. But the eventual separation of church and state brought around a new way of thinking about crime and punishment — a way that stuck.

Italian writer Cesare Beccaria wrote a book — called "On Crime and Punishment" — in which he stated that punishments should match the severity of a crime and that it should be a way to scare others from committing crimes. Cesare Beccaria (1738–94), said that the severity of a punishment should be proportionate to the gravity of the offense This isn't a new idea, of course, but it caught the attention of many since Beccaria also stated that it was more important to prevent crime than to punish it. He also believed that there should be laws and rules in place that everyone must follow when it comes to doling out punishments. He believed that judges should only be allowed to decide if a person was guilty or innocent and that any punishments that needed to be given should be picked from a pre-approved list.

This meant that judges couldn't simply make up whatever punishment they wanted for a guilty criminal. They now had to follow the legislature that specifically stated what the punishment for certain crimes would be, which made it impossible for any judges who still enjoyed cruel and unusual punishment to torture people.

In the early days of criminology, theorists aimed to establish ways to punish crimes without being inhumane or cruel. Torture as punishment was rampant throughout history in some form or another, and the early criminologists believed that torture was wrong. They wanted to find new consequences that fit the severity of the crime while still being humane.

• Adolphe Quetelet and Crime Statistics

Belgian statistician Adolphe Quetelet was one of the very first people to study crime statistics, which were first published in 1872. The statistics were for France, where Quelelet lived as an adult, and they helped establish the foundations of criminology.

Quetelet was able to find commonalities among the criminals, which helped him come up with some ideas of why certain places have higher crime rates than others. He also established the likelihood of crimes based on gender, age and class status.

He found that young men who were uneducated, unemployed and financially insecure were most likely to become criminals. He also discovered that most crimes took place in wealthy neighborhoods that were close to impoverished ones, suggesting that the people from impoverished neighborhoods would go to the wealthy ones to commit crimes.

The statistics also showed that people who lived in generally low-income areas that weren't next to extremely wealthy areas had little crime, suggesting that people were less likely to turn to crime so long as they could provide themselves and their families with the basics without unintentionally being compared to the very rich.

Quetelet concluded that an increase in moral education was needed, which meant breaking down some of the social conditions that pitted people against each other in favor of an equal society in which no one went without.

• Cesare Lombroso and Criminal Characteristics

In the same vein as Quetelet was Italian psychiatrist Cesare Lombroso, who studied the psychological and biological characteristics of criminals. He concluded that there was a hereditary trait that increased the likelihood of a person committing a crime. He also believed that people who committed crimes were less evolved than others, and the act of committing a crime was a reflection on a person's moral character.

Lombroso also discovered that even though educated people were less likely to commit crimes, the crimes committed by educated people were far more gruesome. He concluded that a lack of education wasn't necessarily a big factor in preventing crime.

His theories on how biology impacts the potential to commit crimes greatly influenced modern criminology. Biology and environment are considered two of the staples of criminology today, and criminologists assist governments and law enforcement by studying biological, psychological and environmental characteristics of criminals to provide advice on legal policies.

How Has Crime and Punishment Changed Today?

The biggest change in how we deal with crimes and criminals today is in the types of punishments that are legally allowed. We no longer punish criminals as an act of revenge, and we have, thankfully, done away with torturous punishments, designed to humiliate and inflict pain. Instead, we now focus more on responding to crime with reform.

We also don't have public punishments anymore — while public executions and floggings used to be typical, we now understand that those punishments were less for the sake of rehabilitation and more a way to publicly humiliate a person. Eventually, punishments for crimes became less public and more private.

The Rise of Prisons

Before the 18th century, prisons were mostly used to hold prisoners before their trial or before their public corporal punishment. They weren't considered to be very good at deterring criminals from becoming repeat offenders or a legitimate way to punish a person.

However, as lawmakers began to outlaw public punishments, prisons started to become popular. As a result, 18th-century prisons were extremely overcrowded. Prisoners would often fall ill and die because they were crammed together in small, filthy spaces.

Prison overcrowding was so bad that Britain began banishing criminals to isolated lands, like Australia and the Americas. Plus, prisoners were not separated by crime or even by gender — so a murderer and a petty thief were thrown into the same room with hundreds of other criminals without a second thought.

Corrupt jailers and a lack of staff to help keep the prison safe and secure made for even worse circumstances — and many times, people would stay in prison for longer than their sentence because they couldn't afford to pay the jailers to let them out.

People began suggesting the need for prison reform, but it wasn't until the 19th century that it truly began.

How Did Prisons Change in the 19th Century?

The 19th century saw prison reform in the way of individual cells. Advocates like Elizabeth Fry worked to improve the conditions for women in prison and took it upon themselves to teach imprisoned women certain skills.

Men's prisons often had cruel practices, such as forcing prisoners to remain isolated — not even allowed to talk, in some cases — and inactive. Corporal punishment, like flogging, was still the norm, just done inside prison walls now — this resulted in many prisoners killing themselves, supporting Fry's claim that prisons were inhumane and uncivilized.

She advocated for improvements for the lives of prisoners and helped change society's attitude about prisons and prisoners — mainly that prisoner rehabilitation was a better use of taxes.

How Did Prisons Change Over Time?

From the early 20th century through today, prisons have changed and been improved as we become more and more aware of how humanity functions. The cruel and unusual punishments that still hung around in prisons in the 19th century began to be phased out, once it was understood that they were ineffective.

Instead, we now focus more on rehabilitation and reform. Improvements in the prison system include better food, sanitary conditions and the opportunity for inmates to take classes and learn useful trade skills they can use once freed. Instead of focusing on how to punish people for crimes they've committed, we now work to understand what led them to commit the crime and find ways to prevent others from following similar paths.

We also have started to understand the importance of prison as a place in which to rehabilitate the person, so they can return to society with new skills and education that may not have been available to them before.

Approaches for Punishment against Crime 

The types of punishment listed by the University of Oxford handbook include the first four of the following. The idea of restorative justice is newer. Today’s experts in criminology see it as a valid criminal punishment option. Those who judge the types of crimes and their punishments typically use one of the following approaches to guide them. Retribution

This is one of the first forms of punishment – essentially the idea of “an eye for an eye.” Those who favor retribution believe it gives the victims of crime, or society as a whole, a sense of satisfaction knowing a criminal received the appropriate level of punishment for the crime committed. Lawmakers face the task of determining these appropriate levels of punishment, which can range from speeding ticket fine amounts to mandatory sentences for certain crimes.

Deterrence

Deterrence aims to prevent future crime and can focus on specific and general deterrence. Specific deterrence deals with making an individual less likely to commit a future crime because of fear of getting a similar or worse punishment. General deterrence refers to the impact on members of the public who become less likely to commit a crime after learning of the punishment another person experienced.

Rehabilitation 

Rehabilitation seeks to prevent future crime by altering a criminal’s behavior. This typically includes offering a host of programs while in prison, including educational and vocational programs, treatment center placement, and mental health counseling. This approach also typically gives judges the flexibility to mix in rehabilitation programs as part of a criminal’s sentencing. The goal is to lower the rate of recidivism, or people committing another crime after getting released from prison.

Incapacitation

This is another ancient approach that remains popular. Incapacitation simply means removing a person from society. This includes incarceration in prison, house arrest and, in its more dire form, execution. Many feel the flaw in this approach is that it doesn’t address rehabilitation or recidivism, the latter of which tends to remain high in societies that practice incapacitation.

Restoration 

This new approach to criminal justice calls for the offender to make direct amends to the victim of their crime, as well as the community where the crime occurred. Judges use this approach mostly with juvenile offenders. In this approach, the criminal and the victim meet so that the offender can hear what the victim says about their experience with the crime committed. The offender then strives to make amends and seek forgiveness.

These theories are intricately involved in studies on the types of crimes and their punishments. Society developed each of them with the idea of ensuring appropriate punishment for criminals and safety for society. 

iii) Typologies of Crime

Typology is the categorization of concepts in an academic field. In criminology, categorizing concepts into types is a very useful pursuit because it allows criminologists and the justice system to monitor and address crime. Typologies of crime and criminals provide information with which to make decisions, policies, practices, and laws. Typologies are used at all stages of the criminal justice process.

Typologies—defined as organized systems of types—are a well-established analytic tool in the social sciences.

CRIMINAL TYPOLOGY is criminological theory made manageable in a way that can be practically applied to organize, classify, and make sense of a range of behaviors that violate the law.

In 1876, Cesare Lombroso, a medical doctor in Italy, and founder of the Positive School of Criminology wrote the first treatise on the biological and typological theory of the criminal.

It may be explained as,

1. Violent crime;

In a violent crime, a victim is harmed by or threatened with violence. Violent crimes include rape and sexual assault, robbery, assault and murder. Violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and no negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes are defined in the UCR Program as those offenses which involve force or threat of force.

If someone is violent, or if they do something which is violent, they use physical force or weapons to hurt, injure, or kill other people. Violent behavior is any behavior by an individual that threatens or actually harms or injures the individual or others or destroys property. Violent behavior often begins with verbal threats but over time escalates to involve physical harm.

Causes to do violent act: Violent criminals often display characteristics such as low anger threshold, disinhibiting/absence of impulsivity control, strong dominance/territorial instinct, antisocial personality, psychological/mental health issues and aggressive tendencies which enable them to carry out usually violent acts.

Consequences and reaction of victim: Crime victims often suffer

a broad range of psychological and social injuries that persist long after their physical wounds have healed. Intense feelings of anger, fear, isolation, low self-esteem, helpless- ness, and depression are common reactions.

2. Property crime;

A property crime means, a victim's property is stolen or destroyed, without the use or threat of force against the victim.

Property crime is a crime to obtain money, property, or some other benefit.

This may involve force, or the threat of force, in cases like robbery or extortion. Property crimes include larceny-theft, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and arson.

Risk-tolerant, impatient young men are more likely to commit property crime, while people with low self-control tend to commit violent, drug and sexual offenses. Property crimes produce instability within the community. When property loss occurs, fear increases and the likelihood of flight out of the neighborhood increases as well. Once the flight of residents occurs, the demographic makeup changes can affect the businesses.

1) Robbery - In considering if robbery is a property crime, think about how it is conducted using direct violence or the threat of violence to take personal property or money from another person. Robberies can occur in various places such as banks, retail establishments, or even when a person is riding a bus or standing on the sidewalk.

2) Shoplifting - Stealing or hiding merchandise from a retail establishment is considered shoplifting. If a person takes a good from a place they were required to pay for it, it is considered shoplifting.

3) Burglary - Burglary is when a person enters a home or building illegally, usually through force, and steals property. Property offenses such as burglary occur when a person enters an establishment with the intent to take something that does not belong to them.

4) Vandalism - Vandalism is the act of destroying or desecrating property, usually without permission. Damage from vandalism such as breaking windows, graffiti, or intentional damage to a vehicle, could be considered criminal.

5) Arson - Arson is a property offense that involves intentionally setting fire to any land or structure. Setting fire to an inhabited building or for insurance fraud can increase the severity of the arson charge.

6) Theft - Theft is deliberately taking something from someone. Property theft is what is traditionally known as stealing something from another person or entity.

7) Larceny - Larceny is taking something valuable from someone not by force, violence, or fraud. For the property crime to be considered larceny, a physical item that can be carried away must be taken.

8) Trespassing - Trespassing is considered a property crime due to a person inhabiting or entering someone's property without permission. While no harm may be intentional, the lack of consent to be on the property makes it a crime.

9) Extortion - Extortion is illegally obtaining property or money from another person in a way other than theft. A person can use the threat of violence against the victim or their family, intimidation, or force to gain something from an individual or organization.

10) Embezzlement - Embezzlement happens when there is a theft or misappropriation of property or money by someone who should be trusted to be around those assets. This means that the person with whom the assets were entrusted fraudulently takes or uses them for personal gain

Causes: There are many causes of property crime. These include poverty, peer group pressure, substance abuse and opportunism. This may also include, Poverty, parental neglect, low self-esteem, alcohol and drug abuse can be connected to why people break the law.

Consequences: Property crimes in a community can cause the feeling of a lack of security and spread fear. It directly impact on the victim in term of financial lost.

3. White-collar crime;

The term, coined in 1939 by the American criminologist Edwin Sutherland, drew attention to the typical attire of the perpetrators, who were generally businesspeople, high-ranking professionals, and politicians.

White-collar crime is an illegal activity for financial gain which is nonviolent but economically hazardous. The main purpose of these crimes is to obtain money and property, avoid losing existing property or gain a personal or commercial advantage. Securities fraud, embezzlement, corporate fraud, and money laundering are white-collar crimes.

White-collar crime is generally non-violent in nature and includes public corruption, health care fraud, mortgage fraud, securities fraud, and money laundering. Typical white-collar crimes may also include wage theft, fraud, bribery, Ponzi schemes, insider trading, labor racketeering, embezzlement, cybercrime, copyright infringement, money laundering, identity theft, and forgery

Bernie Madoff is famous for committing one of the most famous white-collar crimes this century. It's certainly one of the largest in terms of monetary value. Bernie ran a Ponzi scheme (an investment scam that offers investors extremely high returns. It pays such returns to the initial investors with the newly deposited funds of new investors. When the scammer is no longer able to attract a sufficient number of new clients to pay off the old ones, the scheme collapses like a house of cards, leaving many investors with huge losses) from around 1991 until he was finally arrested in December 2008 after a lengthy investigation.

Causes: Some of the motivations that drive a white-collar criminal include: No regard for a company or industry ethics. Believing that their actions aren't serious enough to have any major consequences. Believing that they won't get caught for doing it anonymously.

They are caused due to the following reasons – - greed, - lack of awareness among people, - lack of strict rules and laws, - lack of accountability, - peer support, - loopholes of legal structure, - technological and industrial development, etc.

Consequences: Consequences of white collar crime, include prison, substantial fines, and restitution. In addition to criminal penalties, white-collar offenses often give rise to civil lawsuits. Although it is nonviolent in nature, the authorities take white-collar crime very seriously.

The most serious potential consequence of white-collar crime is a criminal conviction. Most white-collar crime convictions result in a prison sentence, a monetary fine, or a combination of the two. a defendant may face additional consequences, such as difficulty finding a job and the stigma of a criminal record.

4. Organized crime;

Organized crime (or organized crime) is a category of transnational, national, or local groupings of highly centralized enterprises run by criminals to engage in illegal activity, most commonly for profit.

Organized crime is a continuing criminal enterprise that rationally works to profit from illicit activities that are often in great public demand. Its continuing existence is maintained through the corruption of public officials and the use of intimidation, threats or force to protect its operations.

Electronic surveillance, undercover operations, and the use of informants are the most important techniques that have assisted investigative agencies to combat organized crime.

Organized crimes are generally classified into the following four major types:

Organized gang criminality: Bank robbery, hijacking, murder, kidnapping, automobile and jewel theft, Racketeering, Syndicate Crime, Smuggling. etc

According to the Global Organized Crime Index 2021, Italy ranks first among countries in Europe for the presence of mafia-style groups. The Mafia is currently most active in the Northeastern United States, with the heaviest activity in New York, Philadelphia, New Jersey, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and New England, in areas such as Boston, Providence and Hartford.

Mafias organized according to a vertical order (such as the Cosa Nostra and the 'Ndrangheta) are characterized by the presence of higher levels of coordination, centralized power, and systemic decision-making processes. Charles "Lucky" Luciano Mugshot 1931 was an Italian-American mobster, considered the founder and father of organized crime in America and the most powerful Mafia boss of all time.

Causes: The causes of crime are complex. Poverty, parental neglect, low self-esteem, alcohol and drug abuse can be connected to why people break the law. Some are at greater risk of becoming offenders because of the circumstances in which they are born. Opportunity factors for organized crime are of four types: economic, governmental, law enforcement, and social or technological changes. Changing combinations of these factors help determine the nature and extent of organized crime in a specific area.

Consequences: Organized crime has negative effects on society. For example: ... This kind of activity can reduce safety and livability in a city or neighborhood. Organized crime groups can also work with local criminals, leading to an increase in corruption, extortion, racketeering and violence, as well as a range of other more sophisticated crimes at the local level. Violent gangs can also turn inner cities into dangerous areas and put citizens' lives at risk. Organized crime undermines international peace and security by sustaining violence and armed conflict. The illicit arms trade is ranked as the third most pervasive illicit market globally.

5. Consensual or victimless crime.

Victimless crime, also called consensual crime, refers to crime that doesn't directly harm the person or property of another. A victimless (having no victim: not of a nature that may produce a complainant. a victimless crime) crime is an illegal act that is consensual and lacks a complaining participant, including such activities as drug use, galnblina, pornography, and prostitution. No one is harmed, or if harm occurs, it is negated by the informed consent of willing participants. Consensual (mean: existing or made by mutual consent without an act of writing) crimes can be described as crimes in which the victim is the state, the judicial system, or society at large and so affect the general (sometimes ideological or cultural) interests of the system, such as common sexual morality.

Definitions of victimless crimes vary in different parts of the world and different law systems, but usually include possession of any illegal contraband, recreational drug use, prostitution and prohibited sexual behavior between consenting adults, assisted suicide, and smuggling among other similar infractions. Prostitution, drug use, trespassing, underage gambling, and traffic violations like speeding and failing to use turn signals are the most common victimless crimes.

Causes: Consensual crime is illegal behavior in which people participate voluntarily, Victimless crimes like drug use could be harmful to the perpetrator but don't directly harm others, although police and prosecutors may argue that victimless crimes harm society as a whole.

Consequences: The offenders' families may be hurt, and victimless crimes could even lead to other problems where there are unwilling victims. For example, prostitution and homosexuality might lead to the spread of AIDS.

Many victimless crimes begin because of a desire to obtain illegal products or services that are in high demand. Criminal penalties thus tend to limit the supply more than the demand, driving up the black-market price and creating monopoly profits for those criminals who remain in business. Victimless crimes are capable of creating gang subculture because of involvement of demand and money. Decriminalizing such crimes is against the moral values as they cost the core values of the society, diminish the quality of life and cause real harm to society.

Within each category, many more specific crimes exist. For example, violent crime includes homicide, aggravated (Serious) and simple assault, rape and sexual assault, and robbery, while property crime includes burglary (Break-in or stealing), larceny (Robbery or theft), motor vehicle theft, and arson (Burning related).

These highlight here are the most important dimensions of the major categories of crime and the issues they raise for public safety and crime control.

Unlike geographic profiling, which looks at the distribution of a series of crimes, typological profiling focuses primarily on behavioral evidence obtained at the scene(s) of specific crime(s). Evidence about how the offender committed the crimes is used to assign them to a particular category of offender.

iv) Fundamental elements of the crime

The Crime Triangle identifies three factors that create a criminal offense. Desire of a criminal to commit a crime; Target of the criminal's desire; and the Opportunity for the crime to be committed.

In general, every crime involves three elements: a criminal act, also called actus reus; a criminal intent, also called mens rea; and the causation (Relation) between the act and the effect or concurrence of the two.

As a result, mens rea denotes the intention to commit the illegal act. An act must be conducted with a guilty conscience to be considered a crime. We can say that mens rea means “guilty mind.” On the other hand, the actus reus means “guilty act.” It is a requirement in showing that a criminal act was performed. While mens rea ("guilty mind" in Latin) is considered in determining the severity of the criminal offense. Actus reus must be present for a criminal conviction.

A. Actus reus ("culpable action" in Latin)

Required to determine whether a crime has been committed, Actus Reus is the physical aspect of a crime. The accused needs to have done something or omitted to do something, resulting in injury to the plaintiff, or the victim in civil cases. Without a guilty act, there can be no crime and no suit for damages can arise.

For actus reus to be made out there must be a voluntary commission of an unlawful act. All actions are presumed to be voluntary, but the defence can argue that there was no actus reus because the defendant had no voluntary control of his or her actions.

Actus reus generally involves three elements or components:

1. A voluntary act or failure to perform an act,

2. That causes,

3. A social harm condemned under a criminal statute.

The actus reus of the offence is the destruction or damage of property which belongs to somebody other than the defendant. It is the result of the defendant’s actions that satisfy the actus reus rather than the actions themselves, with the additional circumstance being that the property destroyed or damaged belongs to somebody other than the defendant. In actus reus three elements/types are included.

 Conduct - some action that results in damage to property;

 Circumstance - the property belongs to somebody other than the defendant;  Result - the property is damaged or destroyed.

Example. A attacked B with a knife in order to occupy his property. In the above case, the thought of illegally occupying the property of B is the guilty intention i.e Mens Rea while attacking B with a knife is the Actus Reus i.e an overt act to reach the intention.

Actus reus refers to the act or omission that comprise the physical elements of a crime as required by statute. Actus reus includes only a voluntary affirmative act, or an omission (failure to act), causing a criminally proscribed result. For example, if a thief shoves a gun into the side of a victim and says: “Your money or your life” - the shoving of the gun is the actus reus.

B. Mens Reus: “guilty mind.”

The intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused. The intent to commit a crime is officially known as “mens rea,” which is Latin for “guilty mind.” The mens rea required for an offence will be applied to three types of elements. Elements of conduct, circumstances, and consequence. The mens rea does not require that the accused be aware that what they are doing is a crime. Virtually all crimes listed in state and federal criminal codes require some degree of mens rea.

The Penal Code recognizes four different levels of mens rea:

1. Purpose (same as intent),

2. Knowledge,

3. Recklessness

4. Negligence.

1. Purpose/Intent: This is the explicit and conscious desire to commit a dangerous or illegal act. For example, if a person targets and assaults someone with the goal of inflicting harm on the victim, he is displaying criminal intent.

2. Knowledge: This term applies if a person is aware that his or her actions will have certain results, but does not seem to care. For example, if a person violently lashes out at someone, inflicting harm may not be her primary goal. However, if she was aware that harm would be a predictable result of her actions, then she is guilty of having criminal knowledge.

3. Recklessness: Recklessness is the decision to commit a certain action despite knowing about associated risks. For example, if a person causes injury while driving drunk, he can be found guilty of recklessly causing harm. He did not intend to hurt anyone, and did not expect it to happen, but he knew he was taking the risk of hurting someone by driving while inebriated.

4. Negligence: This is the mildest form of criminal culpability. A person commits negligence when she fails to meet a reasonable standard of behavior for her circumstances. For example, if a child is injured because his or her caretaker failed to perform her duties, she may be guilty of criminal negligence.

One of the elements the prosecution is generally required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt is the defendant's mens rea. Mens rea needs to be proved by prosecution from offence to offence.

2. Perspective of Security

i) Meaning and concept of Security

ii) Evolution of security iii) Typologies of security iv) Components of security

v) Fundamentals of security

vi) Psychological, Sociological, Economic, and Environmental explanation

3. Security Challenges in Pakistan: 1947–2022

i) National Internal Security Policy Scope, Vision, and Objectives ii) National Internal Security policy implementation iii) National Internal Security Framework iv) Evolution of national security structures in Pakistan

v) The Evolution of the National Security State in Pakistan vi) Security Threats Confronting Pakistan. Internal/External vii) Regional Security Cooperation/ International

 viii) Role and structure of Internal Security Agencies

4. The Governance of Policing and Security in Pakistan

i) Introduction to policing ii) Definition iii) Types of policing iv) Role and functions

 v) Organizational structure

5. Global security threats

i) Human security ii) Health security iii) Food security iv) Water security

v) Economic Security vi) Energy security vii) Cyber security viii) Maritime security

ix) Climate change: emerging insecurities

x) Biodiversity and security xi) Urban safety: a collective challenge for sustainable human settlements xii) Globalization, poverty, and security xiii) Trade and security xiv) Women, war, and peace

 xv) Migration, development, and security

History of Crime & Punishment | How Criminology Has Evolved (volocars.com)

me butCrime and Security

This course covers fundamental issues, Crime and security policies, typologies and historical perspectives of security. This course also highlights the understanding of how security threats are defined and addressed; how something becomes a "security" problem; i.e. securitization. It helps to understand the dynamics by which actors prioritize security threats.

Course Outline:

Introduction:

1. Perspective of Crime

i) Meaning and definition of Crime

'Crime' is an antisocial, immoral, or sinful behavior. However, according to the legal definition, 'Crime' is any form of conduct that is declared to be socially harmful in a State and as such forbidden by law under the pain of some punishment.

Crime is “an intentional act or omission in violation of criminal law …, committed without defense or justification, and sanctioned by the state as a felony or misdemeanor.

Cohen and Felson originally proposed the theory in a famous 1979 article. Marcus Felson has gone on to develop it more clearly and extensively in a book now in its third edition (Felson 1994, 1998, 2002). The theory can be summarised as: “A crime occurs when a suitable target and a potential offender meet at a suitable time and place lacking capable guardianship.”

Crime, the intentional commission of an act usually deemed socially harmful or dangerous and specifically defined, prohibited, and punishable under criminal law.

Possible punishments determine the differences between misdemeanors and felonies. Misdemeanors are non-serious, minor crimes that the government punishes by confinement in a local jail for a year or less. Examples include petty theft, simple assault, disorderly conduct, and disturbing the peace. Felonies are serious crimes that the government punishes by death or incarceration in a prison for at least a year. This group includes such crimes as murder, rape, robbery, and burglary.

ii) History of Crime and Punishment

In some ancient cultures, law breakers were put to death by stoning, crucifixion (a method of capital punishment in which the victim is tied or nailed to a large wooden cross or beam and left to hang until eventual death from exhaustion and asphyxiation), being burned at the stake (Execution by fire), and even slowly being crushed by elephants. Later societies found these methods to be cruel and unusual forms of punishment and sought out more humane practices.

Hammurabi and the Laws of Retribution

Hammurabi was a Babylonian king who ruled from 1792 until 1750 B.C.E. The Code of Hammurabi was a set of legal precedents for different types of crimes and disputes, ranging from family law to contracts and major crimes — this is one of the earliest examples of the "innocent until proven guilty" adage that we still follow today.

The Code of Hammurabi included specific punishments based on the criminal's age, social class and gender. For example, if a rich man was found guilty of stealing, he would be charged a higher fine than if a slave was found guilty of stealing. Alternately, the punishment for killing a rich person would be far more severe than for killing a slave.

Plato and Aristotle

Early philosophers play a major role in how we look at crime and punishment today. They also help us understand why crime and punishment are important. They helped humanity understand that the reason for committing a crime can have an impact on how severe a punishment should be.

Plato and Aristotle, in particular, are responsible for our understanding of the relationship between crime and punishment today. These two philosophers helped us understand why it's equally important to uncover why a person commits a crime as it is to ensure others don't commit the same crime. They also pointed out that the two are often closely related, as well:

• Plato: Plato claimed that a major reason why people commit crimes was because of a lack of education and wealth. People who lived in poverty and who were uneducated — probably because they couldn't afford to get an education — were more likely to commit crimes, often just to survive. Plato believed that crimes should be punished, of course, but the punishment should reflect the degree of fault rather than the severity of the crime. For example, if a man was caught stealing bread to feed his starving family, he should receive a lesser punishment than a man who steals bread for himself.

• Aristotle: Meanwhile, Aristotle was explaining that punishments and responses to crime should be used as an opportunity to prevent others from committing crimes. He believed that when criminals receive punishment, it should be severe enough that it warns the rest of society to not commit the same crime while also reminding the criminal to not commit a crime again.

Roman law and Secularism

The Romans were the first people to look at crime and punishment as purely human traits. Historical crime and punishment commonly claimed that punishing a criminal was "doing God's work" and that committing a crime was the same as sinning.

But the Romans saw crime as an insult to society as a whole, and Roman law was established to bring order to society. Roman law was less concerned with pleasing religious deities and more concerned with ensuring society was safe, orderly, and fair.

Many of the basics of Roman law are still practiced in modern civil law and criminal justice in the 21st century.

Middle Ages and Christianity

The evolution of crime and punishment took a few steps backward in the middle Ages when the rise of Christianity made it closely linked to religion again. This meant, once again, crimes were considered to be acts against God, and punishments for these crimes were God's work.

The punishments for crime were still cruel, severe, and often inhumane because they were designed to rid the criminal of the devil's influence. Historical crime and punishment were violent and gory, including a type of punishment designated for situations in which a person's guilt was unclear.

In a "trial by ordeal," a person would be put into a life-threatening situation, and their survival would reveal whether they were guilty or innocent.

• St. Thomas Aquinas

It wasn't until St. Thomas Aquinas wrote his "Summa Theologica," a treatise on law, crime and punishment, that the history of punishment started turning towards secularism. Aquinas explained that there was a God-given "natural law" that existed and that humans were naturally designed to do good.

When a human committed a crime, Aquinas believed it was both an affront to God as well as society. He claimed that crimes negatively impacted both the victims and the criminals. The victim was negatively impacted because they were the victim of a crime, but the criminal was to be pitied because, by committing a crime, they were moving further away from God and losing their humanity.

It was Aquinas and his compassionate take on punishments that helped create modern laws.

• Cesare Beccaria and Secularism

Secularism has popped up and disappeared several times throughout the history of crime and punishment. But the eventual separation of church and state brought around a new way of thinking about crime and punishment — a way that stuck.

Italian writer Cesare Beccaria wrote a book — called "On Crime and Punishment" — in which he stated that punishments should match the severity of a crime and that it should be a way to scare others from committing crimes. Cesare Beccaria (1738–94), said that the severity of a punishment should be proportionate to the gravity of the offense This isn't a new idea, of course, but it caught the attention of many since Beccaria also stated that it was more important to prevent crime than to punish it. He also believed that there should be laws and rules in place that everyone must follow when it comes to doling out punishments. He believed that judges should only be allowed to decide if a person was guilty or innocent and that any punishments that needed to be given should be picked from a pre-approved list.

This meant that judges couldn't simply make up whatever punishment they wanted for a guilty criminal. They now had to follow the legislature that specifically stated what the punishment for certain crimes would be, which made it impossible for any judges who still enjoyed cruel and unusual punishment to torture people.

In the early days of criminology, theorists aimed to establish ways to punish crimes without being inhumane or cruel. Torture as punishment was rampant throughout history in some form or another, and the early criminologists believed that torture was wrong. They wanted to find new consequences that fit the severity of the crime while still being humane.

• Adolphe Quetelet and Crime Statistics

Belgian statistician Adolphe Quetelet was one of the very first people to study crime statistics, which were first published in 1872. The statistics were for France, where Quelelet lived as an adult, and they helped establish the foundations of criminology.

Quetelet was able to find commonalities among the criminals, which helped him come up with some ideas of why certain places have higher crime rates than others. He also established the likelihood of crimes based on gender, age and class status.

He found that young men who were uneducated, unemployed and financially insecure were most likely to become criminals. He also discovered that most crimes took place in wealthy neighborhoods that were close to impoverished ones, suggesting that the people from impoverished neighborhoods would go to the wealthy ones to commit crimes.

The statistics also showed that people who lived in generally low-income areas that weren't next to extremely wealthy areas had little crime, suggesting that people were less likely to turn to crime so long as they could provide themselves and their families with the basics without unintentionally being compared to the very rich.

Quetelet concluded that an increase in moral education was needed, which meant breaking down some of the social conditions that pitted people against each other in favor of an equal society in which no one went without.

• Cesare Lombroso and Criminal Characteristics

In the same vein as Quetelet was Italian psychiatrist Cesare Lombroso, who studied the psychological and biological characteristics of criminals. He concluded that there was a hereditary trait that increased the likelihood of a person committing a crime. He also believed that people who committed crimes were less evolved than others, and the act of committing a crime was a reflection on a person's moral character.

Lombroso also discovered that even though educated people were less likely to commit crimes, the crimes committed by educated people were far more gruesome. He concluded that a lack of education wasn't necessarily a big factor in preventing crime.

His theories on how biology impacts the potential to commit crimes greatly influenced modern criminology. Biology and environment are considered two of the staples of criminology today, and criminologists assist governments and law enforcement by studying biological, psychological and environmental characteristics of criminals to provide advice on legal policies.

How Has Crime and Punishment Changed Today?

The biggest change in how we deal with crimes and criminals today is in the types of punishments that are legally allowed. We no longer punish criminals as an act of revenge, and we have, thankfully, done away with torturous punishments, designed to humiliate and inflict pain. Instead, we now focus more on responding to crime with reform.

We also don't have public punishments anymore — while public executions and floggings used to be typical, we now understand that those punishments were less for the sake of rehabilitation and more a way to publicly humiliate a person. Eventually, punishments for crimes became less public and more private.

The Rise of Prisons

Before the 18th century, prisons were mostly used to hold prisoners before their trial or before their public corporal punishment. They weren't considered to be very good at deterring criminals from becoming repeat offenders or a legitimate way to punish a person.

However, as lawmakers began to outlaw public punishments, prisons started to become popular. As a result, 18th-century prisons were extremely overcrowded. Prisoners would often fall ill and die because they were crammed together in small, filthy spaces.

Prison overcrowding was so bad that Britain began banishing criminals to isolated lands, like Australia and the Americas. Plus, prisoners were not separated by crime or even by gender — so a murderer and a petty thief were thrown into the same room with hundreds of other criminals without a second thought.

Corrupt jailers and a lack of staff to help keep the prison safe and secure made for even worse circumstances — and many times, people would stay in prison for longer than their sentence because they couldn't afford to pay the jailers to let them out.

People began suggesting the need for prison reform, but it wasn't until the 19th century that it truly began.

How Did Prisons Change in the 19th Century?

The 19th century saw prison reform in the way of individual cells. Advocates like Elizabeth Fry worked to improve the conditions for women in prison and took it upon themselves to teach imprisoned women certain skills.

Men's prisons often had cruel practices, such as forcing prisoners to remain isolated — not even allowed to talk, in some cases — and inactive. Corporal punishment, like flogging, was still the norm, just done inside prison walls now — this resulted in many prisoners killing themselves, supporting Fry's claim that prisons were inhumane and uncivilized.

She advocated for improvements for the lives of prisoners and helped change society's attitude about prisons and prisoners — mainly that prisoner rehabilitation was a better use of taxes.

How Did Prisons Change Over Time?

From the early 20th century through today, prisons have changed and been improved as we become more and more aware of how humanity functions. The cruel and unusual punishments that still hung around in prisons in the 19th century began to be phased out, once it was understood that they were ineffective.

Instead, we now focus more on rehabilitation and reform. Improvements in the prison system include better food, sanitary conditions and the opportunity for inmates to take classes and learn useful trade skills they can use once freed. Instead of focusing on how to punish people for crimes they've committed, we now work to understand what led them to commit the crime and find ways to prevent others from following similar paths.

We also have started to understand the importance of prison as a place in which to rehabilitate the person, so they can return to society with new skills and education that may not have been available to them before.

Approaches for Punishment against Crime 

The types of punishment listed by the University of Oxford handbook include the first four of the following. The idea of restorative justice is newer. Today’s experts in criminology see it as a valid criminal punishment option. Those who judge the types of crimes and their punishments typically use one of the following approaches to guide them. Retribution

This is one of the first forms of punishment – essentially the idea of “an eye for an eye.” Those who favor retribution believe it gives the victims of crime, or society as a whole, a sense of satisfaction knowing a criminal received the appropriate level of punishment for the crime committed. Lawmakers face the task of determining these appropriate levels of punishment, which can range from speeding ticket fine amounts to mandatory sentences for certain crimes.

Deterrence

Deterrence aims to prevent future crime and can focus on specific and general deterrence. Specific deterrence deals with making an individual less likely to commit a future crime because of fear of getting a similar or worse punishment. General deterrence refers to the impact on members of the public who become less likely to commit a crime after learning of the punishment another person experienced.

Rehabilitation 

Rehabilitation seeks to prevent future crime by altering a criminal’s behavior. This typically includes offering a host of programs while in prison, including educational and vocational programs, treatment center placement, and mental health counseling. This approach also typically gives judges the flexibility to mix in rehabilitation programs as part of a criminal’s sentencing. The goal is to lower the rate of recidivism, or people committing another crime after getting released from prison.

Incapacitation

This is another ancient approach that remains popular. Incapacitation simply means removing a person from society. This includes incarceration in prison, house arrest and, in its more dire form, execution. Many feel the flaw in this approach is that it doesn’t address rehabilitation or recidivism, the latter of which tends to remain high in societies that practice incapacitation.

Restoration 

This new approach to criminal justice calls for the offender to make direct amends to the victim of their crime, as well as the community where the crime occurred. Judges use this approach mostly with juvenile offenders. In this approach, the criminal and the victim meet so that the offender can hear what the victim says about their experience with the crime committed. The offender then strives to make amends and seek forgiveness.

These theories are intricately involved in studies on the types of crimes and their punishments. Society developed each of them with the idea of ensuring appropriate punishment for criminals and safety for society. 

iii) Typologies of Crime

Typology is the categorization of concepts in an academic field. In criminology, categorizing concepts into types is a very useful pursuit because it allows criminologists and the justice system to monitor and address crime. Typologies of crime and criminals provide information with which to make decisions, policies, practices, and laws. Typologies are used at all stages of the criminal justice process.

Typologies—defined as organized systems of types—are a well-established analytic tool in the social sciences.

CRIMINAL TYPOLOGY is criminological theory made manageable in a way that can be practically applied to organize, classify, and make sense of a range of behaviors that violate the law.

In 1876, Cesare Lombroso, a medical doctor in Italy, and founder of the Positive School of Criminology wrote the first treatise on the biological and typological theory of the criminal.

It may be explained as,

1. Violent crime;

In a violent crime, a victim is harmed by or threatened with violence. Violent crimes include rape and sexual assault, robbery, assault and murder. Violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and no negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes are defined in the UCR Program as those offenses which involve force or threat of force.

If someone is violent, or if they do something which is violent, they use physical force or weapons to hurt, injure, or kill other people. Violent behavior is any behavior by an individual that threatens or actually harms or injures the individual or others or destroys property. Violent behavior often begins with verbal threats but over time escalates to involve physical harm.

Causes to do violent act: Violent criminals often display characteristics such as low anger threshold, disinhibiting/absence of impulsivity control, strong dominance/territorial instinct, antisocial personality, psychological/mental health issues and aggressive tendencies which enable them to carry out usually violent acts.

Consequences and reaction of victim: Crime victims often suffer

a broad range of psychological and social injuries that persist long after their physical wounds have healed. Intense feelings of anger, fear, isolation, low self-esteem, helpless- ness, and depression are common reactions.

2. Property crime;

A property crime means, a victim's property is stolen or destroyed, without the use or threat of force against the victim.

Property crime is a crime to obtain money, property, or some other benefit. This may involve force, or the threat of force, in cases like robbery or extortion. Property crimes include larceny-theft, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and arson.

Risk-tolerant, impatient young men are more likely to commit property crime, while people with low self-control tend to commit violent, drug and sexual offenses. Property crimes produce instability within the community. When property loss occurs, fear increases and the likelihood of flight out of the neighborhood increases as well. Once the flight of residents occurs, the demographic makeup changes can affect the businesses.

1) Robbery - In considering if robbery is a property crime, think about how it is conducted using direct violence or the threat of violence to take personal property or money from another person. Robberies can occur in various places such as banks, retail establishments, or even when a person is riding a bus or standing on the sidewalk.

2) Shoplifting - Stealing or hiding merchandise from a retail establishment is considered shoplifting. If a person takes a good from a place they were required to pay for it, it is considered shoplifting.

3) Burglary - Burglary is when a person enters a home or building illegally, usually through force, and steals property. Property offenses such as burglary occur when a person enters an establishment with the intent to take something that does not belong to them.

4) Vandalism - Vandalism is the act of destroying or desecrating property, usually without permission. Damage from vandalism such as breaking windows, graffiti, or intentional damage to a vehicle, could be considered criminal.

5) Arson - Arson is a property offense that involves intentionally setting fire to any land or structure. Setting fire to an inhabited building or for insurance fraud can increase the severity of the arson charge.

6) Theft - Theft is deliberately taking something from someone. Property theft is what is traditionally known as stealing something from another person or entity.

7) Larceny - Larceny is taking something valuable from someone not by force, violence, or fraud. For the property crime to be considered larceny, a physical item that can be carried away must be taken.

8) Trespassing - Trespassing is considered a property crime due to a person inhabiting or entering someone's property without permission. While no harm may be intentional, the lack of consent to be on the property makes it a crime.

9) Extortion - Extortion is illegally obtaining property or money from another person in a way other than theft. A person can use the threat of violence against the victim or their family, intimidation, or force to gain something from an individual or organization.

10) Embezzlement - Embezzlement happens when there is a theft or misappropriation of property or money by someone who should be trusted to be around those assets. This means that the person with whom the assets were entrusted fraudulently takes or uses them for personal gain

Causes: There are many causes of property crime. These include poverty, peer group pressure, substance abuse and opportunism. This may also include, Poverty, parental neglect, low self-esteem, alcohol and drug abuse can be connected to why people break the law.

Consequences: Property crimes in a community can cause the feeling of a lack of security and spread fear. It directly impact on the victim in term of financial lost.

3. White-collar crime;

The term, coined in 1939 by the American criminologist Edwin Sutherland, drew attention to the typical attire of the perpetrators, who were generally businesspeople, high-ranking professionals, and politicians.

White-collar crime is an illegal activity for financial gain which is nonviolent but economically hazardous. The main purpose of these crimes is to obtain money and property, avoid losing existing property or gain a personal or commercial advantage. Securities fraud, embezzlement, corporate fraud, and money laundering are white-collar crimes.

White-collar crime is generally non-violent in nature and includes public corruption, health care fraud, mortgage fraud, securities fraud, and money laundering. Typical white-collar crimes may also include wage theft, fraud, bribery, Ponzi schemes, insider trading, labor racketeering, embezzlement, cybercrime, copyright infringement, money laundering, identity theft, and forgery

Bernie Madoff is famous for committing one of the most famous white-collar crimes this century. It's certainly one of the largest in terms of monetary value. Bernie ran a Ponzi scheme (an investment scam that offers investors extremely high returns. It pays such returns to the initial investors with the newly deposited funds of new investors. When the scammer is no longer able to attract a sufficient number of new clients to pay off the old ones, the scheme collapses like a house of cards, leaving many investors with huge losses) from around 1991 until he was finally arrested in December 2008 after a lengthy investigation.

Causes: Some of the motivations that drive a white-collar criminal include: No regard for a company or industry ethics. Believing that their actions aren't serious enough to have any major consequences. Believing that they won't get caught for doing it anonymously.

They are caused due to the following reasons – - greed, - lack of awareness among people, - lack of strict rules and laws, - lack of accountability, - peer support, - loopholes of legal structure, - technological and industrial development, etc.

Consequences: Consequences of white collar crime, include prison, substantial fines, and restitution. In addition to criminal penalties, white-collar offenses often give rise to civil lawsuits. Although it is nonviolent in nature, the authorities take white-collar crime very seriously.

The most serious potential consequence of white-collar crime is a criminal conviction. Most white-collar crime convictions result in a prison sentence, a monetary fine, or a combination of the two. a defendant may face additional consequences, such as difficulty finding a job and the stigma of a criminal record.

4. Organized crime;

Organized crime (or organized crime) is a category of transnational, national, or local groupings of highly centralized enterprises run by criminals to engage in illegal activity, most commonly for profit.

Organized crime is a continuing criminal enterprise that rationally works to profit from illicit activities that are often in great public demand. Its continuing existence is maintained through the corruption of public officials and the use of intimidation, threats or force to protect its operations.

Electronic surveillance, undercover operations, and the use of informants are the most important techniques that have assisted investigative agencies to combat organized crime.

Organized crimes are generally classified into the following four major types:

Organized gang criminality: Bank robbery, hijacking, murder, kidnapping, automobile and jewel theft, Racketeering, Syndicate Crime, Smuggling. etc

According to the Global Organized Crime Index 2021, Italy ranks first among countries in Europe for the presence of mafia-style groups. The Mafia is currently most active in the Northeastern United States, with the heaviest activity in New York, Philadelphia, New Jersey, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and New England, in areas such as Boston, Providence and Hartford.

Mafias organized according to a vertical order (such as the Cosa Nostra and the 'Ndrangheta) are characterized by the presence of higher levels of coordination, centralized power, and systemic decision-making processes. Charles "Lucky" Luciano Mugshot 1931 was an Italian-American mobster, considered the founder and father of organized crime in America and the most powerful Mafia boss of all time.

Causes: The causes of crime are complex. Poverty, parental neglect, low self-esteem, alcohol and drug abuse can be connected to why people break the law. Some are at greater risk of becoming offenders because of the circumstances in which they are born. Opportunity factors for organized crime are of four types: economic, governmental, law enforcement, and social or technological changes. Changing combinations of these factors help determine the nature and extent of organized crime in a specific area.

Consequences: Organized crime has negative effects on society. For example: ... This kind of activity can reduce safety and livability in a city or neighborhood. Organized crime groups can also work with local criminals, leading to an increase in corruption, extortion, racketeering and violence, as well as a range of other more sophisticated crimes at the local level. Violent gangs can also turn inner cities into dangerous areas and put citizens' lives at risk. Organized crime undermines international peace and security by sustaining violence and armed conflict. The illicit arms trade is ranked as the third most pervasive illicit market globally.

5. Consensual or victimless crime.

Victimless crime, also called consensual crime, refers to crime that doesn't directly harm the person or property of another. A victimless (having no victim: not of a nature that may produce a complainant. a victimless crime) crime is an illegal act that is consensual and lacks a complaining participant, including such activities as drug use, galnblina, pornography, and prostitution. No one is harmed, or if harm occurs, it is negated by the informed consent of willing participants. Consensual (mean: existing or made by mutual consent without an act of writing) crimes can be described as crimes in which the victim is the state, the judicial system, or society at large and so affect the general (sometimes ideological or cultural) interests of the system, such as common sexual morality.

Definitions of victimless crimes vary in different parts of the world and different law systems, but usually include possession of any illegal contraband, recreational drug use, prostitution and prohibited sexual behavior between consenting adults, assisted suicide, and smuggling among other similar infractions. Prostitution, drug use, trespassing, underage gambling, and traffic violations like speeding and failing to use turn signals are the most common victimless crimes.

Causes: Consensual crime is illegal behavior in which people participate voluntarily, Victimless crimes like drug use could be harmful to the perpetrator but don't directly harm others, although police and prosecutors may argue that victimless crimes harm society as a whole.

Consequences: The offenders' families may be hurt, and victimless crimes could even lead to other problems where there are unwilling victims. For example, prostitution and homosexuality might lead to the spread of AIDS.

Many victimless crimes begin because of a desire to obtain illegal products or services that are in high demand. Criminal penalties thus tend to limit the supply more than the demand, driving up the black-market price and creating monopoly profits for those criminals who remain in business. Victimless crimes are capable of creating gang subculture because of involvement of demand and money. Decriminalizing such crimes is against the moral values as they cost the core values of the society, diminish the quality of life and cause real harm to society.

Within each category, many more specific crimes exist. For example, violent crime includes homicide, aggravated (Serious) and simple assault, rape and sexual assault, and robbery, while property crime includes burglary (Break-in or stealing), larceny (Robbery or theft), motor vehicle theft, and arson (Burning related).

These highlight here are the most important dimensions of the major categories of crime and the issues they raise for public safety and crime control.

Unlike geographic profiling, which looks at the distribution of a series of crimes, typological profiling focuses primarily on behavioral evidence obtained at the scene(s) of specific crime(s). Evidence about how the offender committed the crimes is used to assign them to a particular category of offender.

iv) Fundamental elements of the crime

The Crime Triangle identifies three factors that create a criminal offense. Desire of a criminal to commit a crime; Target of the criminal's desire; and the Opportunity for the crime to be committed.

In general, every crime involves three elements: a criminal act, also called actus reus; a criminal intent, also called mens rea; and the causation (Relation) between the act and the effect or concurrence of the two.

As a result, mens rea denotes the intention to commit the illegal act. An act must be conducted with a guilty conscience to be considered a crime. We can say that mens rea means “guilty mind.” On the other hand, the actus reus means “guilty act.” It is a requirement in showing that a criminal act was performed. While mens rea ("guilty mind" in Latin) is considered in determining the severity of the criminal offense. Actus reus must be present for a criminal conviction.

A. Actus reus ("culpable action" in Latin)

Required to determine whether a crime has been committed, Actus Reus is the physical aspect of a crime. The accused needs to have done something or omitted to do something, resulting in injury to the plaintiff, or the victim in civil cases. Without a guilty act, there can be no crime and no suit for damages can arise.

For actus reus to be made out there must be a voluntary commission of an unlawful act. All actions are presumed to be voluntary, but the defence can argue that there was no actus reus because the defendant had no voluntary control of his or her actions.

Actus reus generally involves three elements or components:

1. A voluntary act or failure to perform an act,

2. That causes,

3. A social harm condemned under a criminal statute.

The actus reus of the offence is the destruction or damage of property which belongs to somebody other than the defendant. It is the result of the defendant’s actions that satisfy the actus reus rather than the actions themselves, with the additional circumstance being that the property destroyed or damaged belongs to somebody other than the defendant. In actus reus three elements/types are included.

 Conduct - some action that results in damage to property;

 Circumstance - the property belongs to somebody other than the defendant;  Result - the property is damaged or destroyed.

Example. A attacked B with a knife in order to occupy his property. In the above case, the thought of illegally occupying the property of B is the guilty intention i.e Mens Rea while attacking B with a knife is the Actus Reus i.e an overt act to reach the intention.

Actus reus refers to the act or omission that comprise the physical elements of a crime as required by statute. Actus reus includes only a voluntary affirmative act, or an omission (failure to act), causing a criminally proscribed result. For example, if a thief shoves a gun into the side of a victim and says: “Your money or your life” - the shoving of the gun is the actus reus.

B. Mens Reus: “guilty mind.”

The intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused. The intent to commit a crime is officially known as “mens rea,” which is Latin for “guilty mind.” The mens rea required for an offence will be applied to three types of elements. Elements of conduct, circumstances, and consequence. The mens rea does not require that the accused be aware that what they are doing is a crime. Virtually all crimes listed in state and federal criminal codes require some degree of mens rea.

The Penal Code recognizes four different levels of mens rea:

1. Purpose (same as intent),

2. Knowledge,

3. Recklessness

4. Negligence.

1. Purpose/Intent: This is the explicit and conscious desire to commit a dangerous or illegal act. For example, if a person targets and assaults someone with the goal of inflicting harm on the victim, he is displaying criminal intent.

2. Knowledge: This term applies if a person is aware that his or her actions will have certain results, but does not seem to care. For example, if a person violently lashes out at someone, inflicting harm may not be her primary goal. However, if she was aware that harm would be a predictable result of her actions, then she is guilty of having criminal knowledge.

3. Recklessness: Recklessness is the decision to commit a certain action despite knowing about associated risks. For example, if a person causes injury while driving drunk, he can be found guilty of recklessly causing harm. He did not intend to hurt anyone, and did not expect it to happen, but he knew he was taking the risk of hurting someone by driving while inebriated.

4. Negligence: This is the mildest form of criminal culpability. A person commits negligence when she fails to meet a reasonable standard of behavior for her circumstances. For example, if a child is injured because his or her caretaker failed to perform her duties, she may be guilty of criminal negligence.

One of the elements the prosecution is generally required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt is the defendant's mens rea. Mens rea needs to be proved by prosecution from offence to offence.

2. Perspective of Security i) Meaning and concept of Security

From terrorism to swine flu to the current economic crisis, issues of security, broadly defined and experienced "Crime Prevention comprises strategies and measures that seek to reduce the risk of crimes occurring, and their potential harmful effects on individuals and society, including fear of crime, by intervening to influence their multiple causes." A simple definition is :The measures taken to prevent, or respond to, criminal behavior.

Security may refer to the absence of an immediate existential threat or an unacceptable risk. In contrast to safety, security is mostly concerned with intentional threats. Security is hard to define. For example, one may ask: What exactly are existential threats? And what makes a threat immediate? Also of note is that the word security has different meanings in different contexts, such as in national security, personal security, social security, and environmental security.

The Latin term securitas was used by Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BCE) to translate three related concepts of Greek philosophy: ataraxie (Epicurus), euthymia (Democritus), and apatheia (Stoics). Although it seems unlikely that Cicero actually coined the term, he seems to be the first author who made use of securitas with regard to human existence. Securitas is derived from s(in)e cura, which literally means “not to worry” but also “not to care.” For Cicero the concept is closely connected to living the good life, because he defines securitas as a state of being free from anxiety (Tusculanae disputationes, 5.42). While the state of securitas is linked with the tranquility (Peacefulness) of the soul. The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588– 1679) is sometimes presented as the father of the modern active understanding of security, because in Leviathan (1651) he argued that security was something the state has to provide and maintain. Hobbes claims that without security people live in constant fear.Another concept of security emerged during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries: individual security or security of the person. During the twentieth century, security of the person became a key concept to protect the individual from the state, because during the nineteenth century security had become a synonym for “national security.” Most importantly, individual security has become a core element of human security. Besides security of the person, a chapter in the Human Development Report 1994 titled “New Dimensions of Human Security” also mentions economic security, food security, health security, environmental security, community security, and political security (United Nations Development Program 1994).

Following Bruce Schneier (2003, 11), security “is about preventing adverse consequences from the intentional and unwarranted actions of others.” This definition nicely captures some of the characteristics of the understanding of security in current Western discourses: (1) Security is thought of something to be provided and maintained. Security is about “doing something”. (2) Security is about preventing future events. (3) Security measures might infringe on the freedom of others.

Concept of the Security is protection from, or resilience against, potential harm (or other unwanted coercive change) caused by others, by restraining the freedom of others to act.

Difference between safety and security is:

Safety is the state of being protected against harm or danger, while security is the actions taken to make people or places safe. Safety is about being protected from things that could unintentionally harm you. Safety addresses accidents, natural disasters, and human-made catastrophes.

Security is the deliberate protection against threats while safety is the unintentional protection against threats. Security is about being protected from things that are meant to harm you, security deals with attacks and (serious) criminal acts.

The importance of security in crime prevention and control is to assess the risky situation in their area of operation that could possibly lead to crime or loss of property and come up with possible solutions to avoid them. "Crime Prevention comprises strategies and measures that seek to reduce the risk of crimes occurring, and their potential effects on individuals and society, including fear of crime, by intervening to influence their multiple causes."

National security is a condition that qualified about we shall either be secure, or we shall be insecure. We cannot have partial security. If we are only half secure, we are not secure at all.

 ii) Evolution of security

Pakistan inherited its security structures at the time of partition in the form of both bureaucratic and military organizations which were designed for imperial rule. The new sovereign nation of Pakistan emerged on the map of the world but lacked necessary organizational structure to run the affairs of government of an independent State.

The challenges of establishing a new State from scratch and running it with virtually no resource under hostile conditions were so grave that developing new structures was not a priority. Rather, functional modifications in the existing system were an attractive option. Expediency and short-sightedness continued and no worthwhile changes took place. As a result, national security remained subservient to the structures designed for imperial rule.Whatever may have been the reason for this oversight or omission is not important; over time, these structures should have been transformed to suit the requirements of the sovereign nation of Pakistan. Now Pakistan is facing serious security challenges which are threatening its very existence.

A. Understanding national security structure

The term “national security”, as being used today, has its origin in American “National Security Act of 1947”. This Act created a new structure (National security Council) aimed at taking the security or defense planning away from the military and placing it in the hands of civilian secretary of defense (defense minister). The Act was aimed at ensuring coordination of the activities of the National Military Establishment with other departments and agencies of the government concerned with national security.

What is the government and how is it organized? The government in a democratic system has three main pillars: an elected legislature to make laws, an executive to implement laws, and judiciary to interpret laws and pass judgment in all disputes. Functioning of all these institutions is important for national security of a country, and the failure of any one of them has serious repercussions.

B. Determinants of the structure

The structure defines the distribution of work among different departments of the government and sets rules and regulations to harmonize execution of work. The entire governance depends on the efficiency of this structure.

Structures have a direct impact on individual behavior and the performance of an organization; they must therefore be carefully designed on some rational ground.

There are two types of structures: narrow structures with large number of levels and relatively few individuals at each level, and flat structures with few levels and a large number of employees on each level. In narrow organization, a lot of time is spent in communication, supervision and decision-making. Large resources are wasted in running the organization itself, but are useful for highly specialized service in an environment that does not change. On the contrary, flat organizations spend less time on internal processes, rely on teams and coordinating committees and quickly respond to changing requirements.

Distribution of power also plays a role in the design of an organisation. For centralized decision-making, narrow designs are chosen; and for decentralized decision-making, flat designs are adopted. At the same time, centralized decisionmaking is less responsive to change.

Government structure is not like the corporate organisational structure that can be changed easily. Therefore, designing the structure of a government is an extremely difficult and time consuming task requiring highest level of organisational, administrative and legislative skills and experience. It has to be universally acceptable to all the communities and stakeholders in a nation and robust at the same time to meet the existing and future requirements.

C. Constitution and government structure

The Government of India Act, 1935, laid down the final colonial structure which set the foundations for all the coming constitutions framed in Pakistan. This was the first constitution that recognized federal status of India, giving autonomy to the provinces. It had three components, a legislature both at the federal and provincial level, an executive headed by the governor-general and the judiciary consisting of a supreme court and high courts. Elections were held in 1937 and 1945 with a very small electoral college on communal basis resulting in the emergence of Muslim League and Congress as leading parties of the Muslim and Hindu communities, respectively.

At the federal level, there was a council of minster comprising not more than 10 members appointed by the governor-general. They were responsible for various departments. However, the commander-in-chief (C-in-C) of Indian army was also a member of this council and looked after the affairs of defense as minister of defense department. The federal legislature was not allowed to discuss defenserelated matters including the defense expenditure in the assembly and the governor-general enjoyed discretionary jurisdiction to act on the advice of the Cin-C.

The C-in-C was also not completely under the governor-general. He was appointed by the British monarch and had to operate in the overall defence policy of the British Empire including operations outside the Indian soil over which the legislature had no jurisdiction. The judiciary was composed of a supreme court at the federal level as an appellate court and high courts at the provincial level. The judges were appointed by the British monarch on the recommendation of the governor-general.

Governmental structure (Pakistan)

Pakistan got its independence on paper on August 14, 1947, but not in true sense and spirit even now as the British constitutional and organizational structure still exist in one form of the other.

The government is the top most structure dealing with national security, while all the other structures remain subservient to it, whereas the constitution defines the limits and powers of each. It will not be wrong to say that the constitution lays down the primary structure of national security under which different subordinate institutions are created. Unfortunately, our constitutional history is plagued with controversies, conspiracies and incompetence; with the result that even the first basic structure has not yet been framed properly.

The history of the development of the existing governmental structure can be divided into six periods:-

1. First period: 1947-1958(week governments, unstable period).

2. Second period: 1958- 1969 (strong military regime and stable period of development).

3. Third period: 1972-1977(political period, relatively stable).

4. Fourth period: 1977-1988(military regime dominated by the Afghan war period).

5. Fifth period: 1988-1998 (week democratic and unstable period) 6. Sixth period: 1998- 2008 (military rule under war on terror period).

 1. First period: 1947-1958

The Government of India Act, 1935, together with the Indian Independence Act, 1947, became the interim constitution of the newly established dominion of Pakistan. The first constituent assembly met on 10thAugust 1947 and adopted the said provisional constitution till a new constitution was to be prepared. The new government established after independence was faced with serious problems threatening the very survival of the country and therefore had little time to concentrate on the important task of constitution-making.

The problems did not end but were aggravated with the death of Quaid-i Azam and assassination of Prime Minster Liaqat Ali Khan within the first few years, creating a serious leadership crisis. No constitution-making process could start except for the “Objectives Resolution” which only laid down the Islamic character of the State without clarifying as to what it means and how is to be established. That has since been incorporated into the constitution.

There were frequent changes in the government one after the other till the entire constituent assembly was finally dissolved in 1954 without having framed the constitution. A new assembly was appointed from the existing provincial assemblies, and the first constitution was approved in 1956. It provided for a republican and parliamentary form of government with the State declared as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. President was the head of State, with a cabinet of ministers headed by the prime minister to be selected from the national assembly to aid and advise the president. The legislature, i.e., the national assembly was unicameral with 300 members equally divided between West and East Pakistan to be elected for a five-year term on the basic adult franchise (21 years of age).

According to Keith Callard, many of terms and clauses of this constitution were transferred from the Act of 1935.11 No major change could be made. Instead, it raised new controversies. It dissolved all the existing administrative units to merge into one unit in West Pakistan. It contained Islamic provisions so that no law could be enacted which was repugnant with the injunctions of Islam. The constitution was framed but the sitting assembly did not resign to hold fresh elections. Additionally, the internal situation also deteriorated sharply and, finally, the constitution was abrogated after two years of its coming into force, and martial law was imposed.

 2. Second period: 1958 to 1969

President Skandar Mirza imposed martial law on 7th Oct 1958, dismissing the central and provincial governments and banning all political activity. During his speech, he declared the constitution of 1956 as unworkable, full of dangerous compromises threatening disintegration of the country. A few days later, he resigned to make way for the C-in-C, General Muhammad Ayub Khan, who appointed a constitutional commission under Justice Shahbuddin to investigate the causes of failure of parliamentary system which had led to abrogation of the constitution.

The commission came to the conclusion that due to lack of proper elections, undue interference by the head of State and lack of leadership, the system had failed.13 It also recommended a federal and presidential form of government with a bicameral legislature, but the recommendations of the commission were modified in a cabinet meeting. According to A. K Brohi, President Ayub rejected all recommendations of the commission, and accepted only one, that is, the presidential form of government. A new constitution was drafted in June 1962 with presidential form of government with a unicameral national assembly as the central legislature. It also reduced the seats to 150 to be equally divided between the two federal units of East and West Pakistan.

The president was to be elected by an electoral college of 80,000 members of local body governments. The structure of judiciary was not changed, but a supreme judicial council14 was established with powers to remove any judge of the supreme and high courts. All the Islamic provisions of the previous constitution were restored with an additional advisory Council of Islamic Ideology and an Islamic Research Institution. The constitution did not provide for the separation of power between the president, the legislature and the judiciary. The government established under the 1962 Constitution was highly centralized and authoritarian. That led to the autocratic rule of the president and, finally, President Ayub had to resign, handing over power to C-in-C General Yahya Khan who imposed Martial Law on March 25, 1969.

General Yahya issued a Legal Framework Order under which general elections were held in December 1970 for a total of 300 seats distributed among five provinces and the tribal areas.15 The results of the election gave a clear majority of 160 out of 162 seats in East Pakistan to Sheikh Mujib’s Awami League while Zulifiqar Ali Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party managed to get 81 seats out of 138 seats allocated to all the provinces in the western wing. Sheikh Mujib presented six points mainly concerning provincial autonomy and economic independence which were rejected by Bhutto, creating a serious deadlock. The national assembly was not convened on its scheduled date, and the situation got worse which finally resulted in an armed aggression by India and the country got divided into two.

 3. Third period: 1972-1977

Soon after the dismemberment of the country, General Yahya resigned and handed over power to Bhutto who became the President of Pakistan.

The national assembly met for the first time on April 14, 1972 and during this session again adopted the Indian Act of 1935 together with Act of 1947 with some amendments as the interim constitution of the country. Later, a 25member committee was constituted to prepare the draft of the new constitution of Pakistan to be presented before the national assembly.

The job of the committee was assisted by a constitutional accord which set the basic principles of the constitution. It outlined a parliamentary form of government with a strong prime minster as its head, and a bicameral legislature with a permanent senate of 60 members and an elected national assembly of 200 members. The constitution was finally adopted on April 11, 1973. An important clause was Article 6 which declared any attempt to abrogate the constitution an act of high treason. Moreover, the functions of military were clearly defined in the new constitution so as to stop any future military takeover. The new constitution remained effective for the next five years. During this period, many reforms were introduced, including a major military reform in which Higher Defense Organizations were established.

The government appointed General Sharif as the first Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee on Mar 1, 1976, and General Zia-ul-Haq the new Army Chief after the retirement of General Tika Khan. The situation drastically changed when general elections were held in March 1977. The election resulted in a clean sweep by the ruling PPP which was resented by the opposition parties who boycotted the forthcoming provincial elections, blaming Bhutto of massive rigging and demanding fresh polls and resignation of Bhutto. The situation worsened to such an extent that Chief of Army Staff General Muhammad Zia-ul Haq stepped in and imposed martial law on July 5, 1977, unfortunately, even before the system could evolve into a cohesive working structure, the July 1977 coup disturbed the power balance totally. The military reforms could not effectively carried out to achieve their intended purpose before they were rolled back.

 4. Fourth period: 1977-1988

For the next 10 years, a military regime under Zia ruled the country, using a similar technique as had been done by Gen Ayub earlier. Zia retained the rank of Army Chief till his death and remained the President of Pakistan. He was convinced that the military needs to be accommodated in decision making with the political elite at the national level. He tried to establish a National Security Council (NSC) empowered to make recommendations relating to the issue of a Proclamation of Emergency under Article 232, the security of Pakistan and any other matter of national importance that may be referred to it by the president in consultation with the prime minister.17 That was opposed by most of political circles and the idea had to be dropped.

 5. Fifth period: 1988-1998

After the death of General Zia in a plane crash on August 17, 1988, a new era dawned in Pakistan during which four democratically elected governments were installed and three out of them were removed one after the other on charges of corruption and maladministration by the then presidents. No major reforms could be initiated during this period as the governments themselves were very weak. It was during the second tenure of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif that the issue of establishment of the National Security Council was raised again by the then Army Chief, General Jehangir Karamat, in the first week of October 1998.

The Chief of Army Staff maintained that “a National Security Council or Committee at the apex would institutionalize decision making if it was backed by a team of credible advisors and a think tank of experts.18” This was not liked by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif; consequently, Jehangir Karamat had to resign.

The problem did not end here but took a new turn when controversy over a military led operation in Kargil failed and dispute between the civilian and military structure aggravated. This struggle resulted in another military rule that was slightly different from all the previous takeovers. No martial law was imposed and the sitting government was dismissed and the constitution was held in abeyance.

 6. Sixth period: 1999- 2008

General Pervez Musharraf assumed power on October 12, 1999, after removing Nawaz Sharif’s government. He announced the establishment of the National Security Council (NSC) under the Chief Executive which was formally established on October 30. One of the changes brought by the new government was the insertion of Article 152-A in the constitution which established the NSC as a consultative forum for constitutional cover to the top military commanders in policymaking at the highest level.19 The government moved a bill in the national assembly on April 2, 2004 for setting up the NSC. The president signed the bill on April 19, which established the NSC for the first time through an act of parliament.

The National Security Council comprised 13 members and a secretariat to be headed by a secretary, appointed by the president. The NSC acted as a forum for consultation with the president and the government on matters of national security, including the sovereignty, integrity, defense, security of the State and crisis management. This organization still exists but has become dysfunctional. The rules of business as applicable under the 1973 Constitution as listed in paragraph 20A still mention the complete organization of the NSC and its function. However, Article 152 A of the constitution has since been deleted.

Summary:

National security has not always been correctly understood In Pakistan; it has often been confused with the national defense. The 1973 Constitution thrice mentions “security or defense” which show the mixed understanding, taking these two terms as interchangeable, which they actually are not. Similarly, national security structures are often considered military structures which they are not. National security is the primary function of the government, and the government itself is the highest structure of national security.

Unfortunately, our existing government structures have not been able to change despite the overall change in the situation and national purpose. The only serious effort was made after the dismemberment of the country in 1971 by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. But again his effort could not hold ground and the process were reversed. It is a historical dilemma that everyone who came in power discarded the efforts of his predecessors and took the nation back to the starting point. Both the constituent assembly did the same and invariably took their start of constitution making with the India Act of 1935 and the Independence Act, 1947. Our political leaders have not yet come out of the mindset of old structures.

Pakistan so far has not been able to determine as to how it needs to be governed and by whom. Lack of identity: we do not know who we are; lack of direction; we do not know what we want; and lack of strategy: we do not know what to do. These are very basic question which have not been answered. Unfortunately, Pakistan could not make much progress towards nationhood which has serious repercussions for us and for generation to come. The famous quotation is so true that sixty years ago there was a nation in search of a country and now a country in search of a nation.

What Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah said is;

The constitution of Pakistan has yet to be framed by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. I do not know what the ultimate shape of this constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type, embodying the essential principle of Islam. .Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of man, justice and fair play to everybody. .In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims — Hindus, Christians, and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan. (Broadcast talk to the people of the United States of America on Pakistan recorded

February, 1948)

The constituent assembly has got two main functions. The first .framing our future constitution of Pakistan and the second of functioning as a full and complete sovereign body as the Federal legislature of Pakistan. Dealing with our functions in assembly...

The first function of the government is to maintain law and order, so that life, property and religious belief of its subjects are fully protected by the state...

The second ... biggest curse ... bribery and corruption (system of government functioning) ... we must put it down with iron hand ... black marketing (food security) is another curse ...I think they ought to be very severely punished because they undermine the entire system ... and cause wholesale starvation and want and even death.

The next is ... the evil of nepotism and jobbery (principle of merit) ... must be crushed relentlessly. If we want to make this great state of Pakistan happy and prosperous ... we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of people (human security), especially of the masses and the poor ... Citizen of a state with equal rights, privileges and obligations there will be no end to the progress you will make … I shall always be guided by the principle of justice and fair play without … any prejudice or ill will ... I look forward to Pakistan becoming one of the greatest nations of the world.

Nature has given you everything you have got unlimited resources. The foundation of you state has been laid, and it is now for you to build, and build as quickly and as well as you can. So go ahead and I wish you God speed. (Presidential address by Quaid-i-Azam to the constituent assembly of Pakistan at Karachi, August 11,1947)

Pakistan should be a welfare state with the focus on well-being of its people (human security), having democratic form of government based on the essential principles of Islam. Establishing efficient system of government based on merit, capable of maintaining law and order (internal security) and executing rapid transformation to new realities (change). With this national purpose as set forth by the founding father, the country is likely to move toward the desired direction of becoming one of the greatest nations of the world.

iii) Typologies of security iv) Components of security

v) Fundamentals of security

vi) Psychological, Sociological, Economic, and Environmental explanation

3. Security Challenges in Pakistan: 1947–2022

i) National Internal Security Policy Scope, Vision, and Objectives ii) National Internal Security policy implementation iii) National Internal Security Framework iv) Evolution of national security structures in Pakistan

v) The Evolution of the National Security State in Pakistan vi) Security Threats Confronting Pakistan. Internal/External vii) Regional Security Cooperation/ International

 viii) Role and structure of Internal Security Agencies

4. The Governance of Policing and Security in Pakistan

i) Introduction to policing ii) Definition iii) Types of policing iv) Role and functions

 v) Organizational structure

5. Global security threats

i) Human security ii) Health security iii) Food security iv) Water security

v) Economic Security vi) Energy security vii) Cyber security viii) Maritime security

ix) Climate change: emerging insecurities

x) Biodiversity and security xi) Urban safety: a collective challenge for sustainable human settlements xii) Globalization, poverty, and security xiii) Trade and security xiv) Women, war, and peace

 xv) Migration, development, and security

History of Crime & Punishment | How Criminology Has Evolved (volocars.com)