Public confidence in overall policing arrangements in countries with strongly independent scrutiny of the police is generally high23. 3.1 External review with a degree of civilian oversight In terms of the review of the forty-seven states, it was evident that there were five main types of policing oversight mechanisms in place. These included internal police, public prosecutor, ombudsman, citizen oversight, and ministry for justice. Of the systems set out in the table, those, which include external review with some civilian elements, may be viewed in three main categories as follows24: 1. Civilian review model: investigation, adjudication and recommendation of punishment; 2. Civilian input: the recording and investigation of complaints; and 3. Civilian monitor: oversight of police complaints administration. According to Prenzler and Ronken (2001) the idea of citizen oversight bodies with a range of functions, that includes inspections of police services to an investigation of complaints has been a reality in English speaking states since the late 1950s. Civilian monitor The least intrusive model (from the police perspective) is that which involves civilian monitoring only (type 3). Typically, these systems involve civilian oversight of police-led recording, investigation and adjudication of complaints, mostly of a minor nature. For example, the IPCC in England and Wales oversees and sets the investigative standards for the overwhelming majority of complaints made against the police. Although IPCC staff investigate more serious complaints, in most cases police officers conduct the investigations, monitored by the IPCC. A degree of independence in these cases may be achieved by appointing police investigators drawn from outside the force area in which the complaint arose. There are 43 geographical police forces in England and Wales that are autonomous as regards their administration and operations. Therefore, it has been argued that using investigators from different police forces provides robust and independent investigating authority and which conducted the investigation in the present case, requested the . . . Police Department to carry out an inquiry with the aim of identifying those who had allegedly ill-treated the applicant. As such, the investigating authority delegated a major and essential part of the investigation – identification of the perpetrators of the alleged ill-treatment – to the same authority whose agents had allegedly committed the offence.’ 23 UNODC Handbook on police accountability, oversight and integrity. United Nations, New York 2011 24 Smith, Graham (2004), Rethinking Police Complaints; British Journal of Criminology, 44, pp. 15- 68