About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


55 J. Criminology 3 (2022)

handle is hein.journals/anzjc55 and id is 1 raw text is: Article Journal of Criminology 2022, Vol. 55(1) 3-22 Counter-terrorism m easures © The Author(s) 2021 Article reuse guidelines: and perceptions of police sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/26338076211030955 legitim acy: The im portance lournassagepubcomhome/ni Muslims place on procedural OGE justice, representative bureaucracy, and bounded- authority concerns Mohammed M. Ali and Kristina Murphy Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia Adrian Cherney School of Social Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia Abstract Engaging Muslims in counter-terrorism (CT) has proved challenging for police worldwide. Some research has focussed on the utility of police being procedurally just in their CT strate- gies to enhance their legitimacy and subsequent cooperation from Muslims. Despite the effi- cacy of procedural justice, however, some have argued that procedural justice scholarship is too narrowly focussed on how police treat citizens. Citizens' concerns about police acting within the limits of appropriate power (i.e., bounded-authority concerns), as well as repre- sentativeness in policing (i.e., representative bureaucracy), can also influence citizens' judg- ments of police legitimacy. This study explores how, when, and why procedural justice, bounded authority, and representation concerns shape Muslims' perceptions of police CT measures and police legitimacy. Using focus group data from 104 Australian-Muslims, results revealed that CT measures that include Muslims as partners in terrorism prevention and those that draw on principles of procedural justice were perceived most favourably, and were seen to promote police legitimacy. Measures that were condemned were perceived as bounded-authority violations and damaged police legitimacy. Implications for theory and police practice are discussed. Corresponding author: Kristina Murphy, Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University, 176 Messines Ridge Rd, Mt Gravatt, Brisbane, Australia. Email: t.murphy@griffith.edu.au