Department of Public Security » Office for Coordination and Planning of Police Forces

     Historical-legislative outline of the Office for Coordination and Planning of Police Forces and its position within the Public Security system.

     Following the upsurge of criminal acts that have been committed by Mafia-like and terrorist associations since the second half of the 60s the idea took shape to make a thorough review of the Public Security regulations.

     Taking into account the various bills which were submitted in the meanwhile the government drew up its own proposal on this complex and delicate issue in 1979 and, after two legislatures, it was approved by Act "121" in 1981.

     However, already at the end of 1979, the government deemed it very urgent to identify an adequate organisational pattern to avoid waste of resources or duplication of efforts. To this end, it considered the issue of police forces coordination separately from the broader reform of Public Security Administration.

     The decree-law No. 626 of 15.12.1979, turned into Act No. 23 of 14.2.1980, provided for the setting up of a National Committee for Public Order and Security - with advisory tasks to the Minister of the Interior - and of an "Office" headed by either the "Chief of the Police or his delegate" "in order to implement the guidelines and orders issued by the Minister in the carrying out of his functions of coordination and unitary direction in the field of public order and security".

     Said legislative text was then adopted in a more articulated and organic way in the Act 121/81 that outlined, as it was already said, the new organisation of the Public Security Administration.

     Act 121/81 identifies in detail the system of institutional powers and related functions and establishes the organisational pattern of police forces coordination entrusted with competence that are clearly defined at political and operational level, as well as at central and local level.

     These choices went beyond the prefigured hypotheses of establishing a "Police Corps" (this could have led to gaps among the various administration components that, instead, needed to be coordinated and strengthened" - Report on the government decree-law) and a "General Secretariat" ("there is no raison d'étre in a framework where the Public Security Department represents the best and adequate instrument for the Ministry of the Interior to ensure the high direction of public order and security services as well as the coordination of police forces tasks and activities" - Report on the government decree-law).

     In order to fully evaluate the "grounds" of the reform it is possible to infer some interesting elements from the preparatory works of the two above-mentioned legislative texts (Act No. 23/80 and Act No. 121/81):

  • on 27 January 1977 the House of Representatives approved an agenda by a very large majority where a new organisation of the Public Security Department was welcomed. They considered as important elements "the demilitarisation and the adoption of measures establishing a unitary direction and clear political responsibilities within the police administration through common regulations for all Police Forces".

     The pro tempore Minister of the Interior, Hon. ROGNONI, in his report of 7 February 1980 before the second Commission of the House of Representatives during the discussion on the bill turning the decree-law No. 626/79 into law, states, inter alia, the following:

  • "the measure under discussion is included in a project where the central and top-level elements are represented by the Minister of the Interior, National Authority of Public Security, who is entrusted with the highest powers and the related responsibilities in this field. This guarantees the unitary organization of the Administration articulated structure including and binding all police forces - independently from their accountability - on the basis of their common goals. In this connection, for the first time the decree provides for the legal contents of the coordination activity".

     The legislation (sections 4, 5, 6, of Act 121/81) concerning the Public Security Department and its branches answers to the willingness of ensuring a unitary implementation of the Minister of the Interior's directives on the basis of a unitary political action. This is widely confirmed by the preparatory works themselves.

     As to the bill A.C. No. 895, the pro tempore Minister of the Interior, Hon. ROGNONI, states that:

  • "another qualifying point of the government bill is represented by the determination of a flexible instrument for police forces political and operational coordination. In this way, considering the organisational differences existing among the police forces and those relating to their peculiar activities and operational experiences, the crucial element of their common goals and possibilities of employment are guaranteed in a differentiated but organic project of crime counteraction and safeguard of public order and security. The organisational pattern of the coordination function originates a mechanism for the assignment of clearly defined functions which directly depends on the person responsible at political level for the Administration, in his capacity of public security national authority. The subordination of the structures receiving the guidelines, as well as the particular effectiveness of the latter are, therefore, guaranteed".

     The Parliament willingness to assign the function of coordination to the Public Security Department headed by the Chief of Police - General Director of Public Security - is confirmed by the fact that an opinion expressed by the IV Justice Commission of the House of Representatives was not taken into account and turned into law.

The IV Commission expressed as follows:

  • "in sections 5 or 6 it is to be examined the possibility to place the structures responsible for the implementation of the Minister of the Interior's guidelines for the purposes of police forces unitary direction and coordination outside the Public Security Department and consequently in a separate position. In fact, this coordination function involves all police forces. For this reason it does not seem advisable, under an institutional and functional point of view, to envisage the relevant instruments within a Department that is mainly made up of Central Directions interesting the only State Police".

     Other useful elements confirming what said above can be found in the report of the speaker, Hon. ZOLLA, during the discussion on the bill turning into law the decree-law No.626/79 (session of 7.2.1980 of the II Commission of the House of Representatives):

  • "……….when Hon. FRANCHI wanders how a General Director of the Public Security Administration can coordinate a General with four stars I point out that this complies with our tradition.
    In fact, already in the past, the coordination of police forces included also the Carabinieri Corps.
    How can we assert that the activities carried out by Generals cannot be coordinated by the Prefect? If the Prefect represents entirely the government I do not see why even the Armed Forces local representatives cannot depend on him/her".

     Important is also the report made by Hon. ROGNONI on the same occasion:

  • "………….sec. 3 (that will become sec. 6 of Act 121/81) and in particular letters from a) to g) identify the various moments of this comprehensive activity which results in the coordinated employment of police forces. It is, indeed, a matter of identifying intervention areas with the aim of strengthening the coordinated action in a framework of planned choices under the direction and responsibility of the highest Political Authority in the field of public order and security.
    The need for a major coordination in the field of public order and security involves all the activity phases, including prevention, investigations and suppression.
    As to the fight against crime and subversion, the state avails itself of a unitary reference center supporting the Minister of the Interior, National Authority of Public Security".

     The analysis of the above-mentioned remarks expressed in the Parliament let us understand the innovation introduced in the organisation of the Italian public security system, which is fundamentally characterised by different police forces.

     In this context, as to the functional profiles, the role of "unitary reference centre" conferred to the Department of Public Security established within the administration of Public Security is to be mentioned.

     According to Section 4 of Act No. 121 of 1 April 1981 the Department of Public Security, in compliance with the directives and orders issued by the Minister of the Interior, is responsible for the following:

  1. Implementation of the public order and security policy,

  2. Technical and operational coordination of the police forces,

  3. Direction and administration of the State Police,

  4. Direction and management of technical supports also for the general needs of the Minister of the Interior.

     In order to implement the directives issued by the Minister of the Interior - as to the coordination and management of the public order and security sector - the Department carries out the tasks laid down in the letter a) to g) of Section 6 of the above-mentioned Act.

     Within the Department of Public Security the Office for Coordination and Planning of Police Forces according to Section 5, 1st subsection, letter a) in conjunction with Section 6 of Act 121/81, carries out the tasks laid down in the letter a) to g) of said Section 6.