Predictors of satisfaction with Kenya’s police and Kenya’s criminal justice system: Results from a sample of Kenyan college students

Abstract

Although the influence of procedural justice on citizens’ satisfaction and cooperation with police has been tested in several geopolitical contexts, this is the first study to examine the relationship between procedural justice and satisfaction with Kenya’s police and Kenya’s criminal justice system on a Kenyan college campus. Using a sample of 523 students from a prominent Kenyan university, we found that procedural justice and officer integrity predicted satisfaction with both Kenya’s police and criminal justice system. Also, more highly educated students (sophomores, juniors, and seniors, compared to freshmen) were more satisfied with both the Kenyan police and criminal justice system. Conversely, victims of crime in the community were less satisfied with Kenyan police, and students who had a negative personal experience with police were less satisfied with the country’s criminal justice system. Although instrumental factors of policing (e.g., police effectiveness) were not tested in this study, thus precluding a comparative assessment of normative and instrumental models of policing, this study contributes to the extant literature by pointing out the salience of procedural justice and officer integrity for improving the relationship between the police and the communities they are sworn to serve. The study’s implications for policy are discussed.

Police Procedural Justice, Lawyer Procedural Justice, Judge Procedural Justice, and Satisfaction With the Criminal Justice System: Findings From a Neglected Region of the World

“…Our study also adds to the literature by disaggregating procedural justice into police procedural justice, lawyer procedural justice, and judge procedural justice. Overall, our article not only adds to knowledge about the near-universal influence of procedural justice in effectuating improved government–community relations (Cherney & Murphy, 2013; Murphy et al, 2008; Murphy & Mazerolle, 2016; Nagin & Telep, 2017; Pryce et al, 2017, 2018; Reisig et al, 2018; Tsushima & Hamai, 2015), but also points out the relative influences of different strands of procedural justice—police, lawyer, and judge—on community members’ satisfaction with governmental actors.…”

“…Indeed, the process-based models of policing and courtroom experience have gained wide acceptance because multiple studies have confirmed their usefulness in improving law and order in local communities in many regions of the world (Hinds & Murphy, 2007; Murphy, 2015; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; Tyler, 2007). For the process-based model to gain an even wider acceptance, it must be studied in different geopolitical contexts, and this article adds to the few studies that have taken place in sub-Saharan Africa (Akinlabi, 2017; Boateng, 2016; Pryce et al, 2018). More importantly, this article is the first to delineate and assess the relative effects of different strands of procedural justice on satisfaction with a country’s criminal justice system.…”

Untangling the role of interactions in police satisfaction: Examining direct and indirect contacts with the police

“…Citizens are also sensitive to the manner through which police exercise their authority, such that perceptions of procedural justice of police actions are central to police legitimacy and satisfaction (Braga et al ., 2014; Moore et al ., 2002; Tyler, 2003, 2006). When residents are personally treated in a procedurally fair manner, they are significantly more satisfied with police and compelled to follow directives, a finding that is consistent across cultures (Hinds and Murphy, 2007; Hough et al ., 2013; Pryce et al ., 2019).…”