No sensible person would dispute that the police perform a difficult and essential role in society.
It can be tedious, and it can be thankless. It can be frustrating, and it can be dangerous.
For the most part, members of the New Zealand Police carry out their duties with the highest standards of diligence, competence and honesty and are fully deserving of the trust, and gratitude, invested in them by the public at large.
Summing up her Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct in April 2007, Dame Margaret Bazley said "there was no evidence of any concerted attempt across the organisation to cover up unacceptable behaviour".
These remarks, however, were couched amid a litany of concerns and recomendations that needed to be addressed to ensure that the integrity and the reputation of the police force were preserved.
Primarily, these concerned the "adequacy and impartiality" of police investigations into complaints against members of the police, or associates of the police, and led directly to the establishment of the Independent Police Conduct Authority, out of the former Police Complaints Authority, under a Bill put before Parliament in September last year.
The independent status of the authority was further bolstered with later amendments which sought, according to Associate Justice Minister Rick Barker, to "provide a more credible and effective oversight system that will help ensure increased public confidence that police misconduct will be identified and addressed".
If there were ever any doubts that such measures were necessary then a judgement, and a report, released during the past few days dispel them.
On Friday, Judge Stephen O'Driscoll released his decision regarding an application by Alexandra man Shane Te Ihorangi Cribb for more than $25,000 costs incurred defending himself against a dangerous driving charge.
The case against Mr Cribb was dismissed during a re-hearing at the Alexandra District Court in June.
Mr Cribb had fought for three years to clear his name after his vehicle and another being driven by a police officer collided in Earnscleugh in 2005.
Awarding Mr Cribb almost $18,000 in costs, Judge O'Driscoll said the initial police investigation of the incident was "less than satisfactory" and "not in accordance with best practice".
Notwithstanding the measured judicial language, this amounts to a severe rebuke to all those members of the police involved.
It is possible to read similarly forceful consternation into the Independent Police Conduct Authority's report on the handling by Dunedin police of a suspected ACC fraud case.
It involved ACC claimant Bruce Van Essen's two-year public battle with ACC, police and private investigator Peter Gibbons.
Authority chairwoman Justice Lowell Goddard pointed to deficiencies in the police handling of the case with respect to conflict of interest, conduct of searches, the issuing of warrants, privacy and other issues.
She found the police wanting in these areas - most troublingly in the matter of conflict of interest involving a familial relationship between the ACC investigator and the officer in charge of ACC cases - and the initial police investigation into the complaint "unsatisfactory".
It has been a rough few days for the police and the spotlight will certainly be on their response, especially to the long-awaited IPCA report.
Initial impressions could be thought to be underwhelming.
Police would be forced to review processes relating to conflict of interest and search warrants and all police officers named in the report would be reminded of their duties, acting Southern District Commander Detective Superintendant Malcolm Burgess said.
But no further action would be taken.
Whether that meets the standard of accountability envisaged by Dame Margaret is open to scrutiny.
"New Zealand is fortunate to have a police force in which this kind of misconduct is a relatively rare occurrence.
However the risk that misconduct . . . poses to public confidence in the police is a significant one.
New Zealand police should give high priority to ensuring that the risk is minimised, and that when the misconduct does occur, it is dealt with professionally, expeditiously, and in a manner that gives both complainants and the general public no reason for concern," she said in releasing her report.
As a result of that report, we now have an independent authority, but a nagging question remains: does it have the requisite teeth?
