Administrative Search on ACME Electronics.
Being the new Corporate Security Director for ACME Electronics Company, am in charge of managing the security guards and allocating their different shifts to ensure that the company’s property is safe from vandalism, inferno attack and theft. In the first week of my duty, I realize some shortages in the company’s assets as per the inventory. To counter this, I decide to use the administrative search program as advised by my fellow security professionals.
An administrative search program is whereby people moving in and out a facility are frisked to ensure safety and protect against theft and mostly helps in making the people abide by the regulations of the facility. Administrative search should be accompanied by a search warrant from the law enforcement officers to ensure legal steps are followed (Hans et al., 2018). It commenced in the case of Camara versus the Municipal Court when Camara initiated a search in an apartment claiming that some people had violated laws in the apartment. The court suggested that critical thinking must be applied while weighing whether to search for a certain place or not and the cause for the search should be reasonable. Camara’s case was also backed up by legal proceedings of See versus the City of Seattle which led to a conclusion that a warrant is a necessity before conducting any search.
However warrantless searches can be conducted under given circumstances. These can be in emergency cases or when the owner of the property has permitted the action. This is evident in the case of Colonnade Catering Corporation versus the United States of America whereby the court authorized a warrantless search of an alcohol license owner’s permit. Warrantless searches are permitted following a non-forcible entry (Primus et al., 2011). Forcible entry led to the decline of the evidence provided to the court in Colonnade’s case. In the case of Columbia Heights versus Rozman, which was an argument of a search warrant, the Minnesota Supreme Court referred to article one of the tenth section of the constitutional law which defended the citizens by giving them a right to be free from unnecessary inspections.
Administrative searches were first initiated in 1987 during the case of O’ Connor versus Ortega. The court concluded that an employee’s office can be searched by the employers during the investigation of work-related shortcomings under reasonable circumstances at all times. They employer must have a valid explanation on the reason behind the search. The court made this ruling in favor of the employers saying that the employee’s privacy is only limited under his activities while in the workplace. These measures should be applied for the better performance of a business though many people take it lightly.
The safety of a business is prioritized over an employee’s privacy at all times. While conducting these searches, the court assumes that the main aim of the person conducting the investigation is enhancing efficiency and effectiveness in his business. As the Corporate Security Manager, I should be able to deal with the mismanagement of resources in the facility due to theft and vandalism which brings in an urge for the Administrative Search Program.
Conducting an administrative search is of a great importance not only to the company at large but also to the employees. According to the Fourth Amendment law concerning an administrative search, there are three factors that are mainly considered (Rothstein et al., 1974). The warranty must be issued by a judge who falls in neither sides of the complainants. There should also be a composed explanation on why the warrant should be issued which is backed up by word of mouth from a law enforcement officer. The request for a search warrant should properly explain the place to be searched and the parties involved while conducting the activity. Through these searches we can identify the people who are responsible for the loss of the electronic equipment in the company including the shortages in the company’s inventory.
Once the court has issued the search warrant, I will proceed and conduct a search on every security personnel’s assets and properly analyzing them. I shall conduct the search during the day as a requirement by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. We shall conduct a search in all the properties owned by the employees with the company of law enforcement officers. Negotiations shall be made on an engagement after which force will apply in case of resistance. The employees shall also be frisked every time they leave the company’s premises to ensure that they don’t carry the electronics along with them.
An employee will be confronted at the period of a to avoid the destruction of evidence. Since the victims of these search can cause minimum to no harm to the person’s conducting this program, we will try and apply as minimum force as possible during an engagement or even hostility. Although the reasonableness of this search is more critical hence forceful confrontations allowed, the employees correspondence to the activity will determine the treatment they will receive. This was applied in the case of Wilson vs Arkansas in 1995 whereby the Court agitated for a forceful engagement if the victim shows signs of resistance.
There are some cases where some employees offer maximum resistance or even tend to use their own ways to escape the search (Lippert et al.,2013). Under these circumstances we will hand them over to the police officers and deep investigation done on his property. This eases the process and further shows signs of involvement in the theft crisis. The victim is held as a detainee until the search is completed.
Administrative searches operate on the conveniences of the administrative law which seeks to regulate processes and power of administration from instance public officials. An administrative process provides an advantage over the judicial processes. Administrative preparation enables parties to resolve their dispute. In case of the occurrences of a dispute, they are resolved in a more reasonable manner as compared to the trial court, hence cut cot in an administrative tribunal. Administrative searches proceedings are speedier than in the trial court and the judicial system. Due to the implementation of an administration committee, judicial courts get relief over tackling the administrative matter. A proper sense of expertise is involved in order to evaluate the available evidence keenly. Under their agency, administrative organization provides uniform statute applications.
Administrative searches offer room for exactness. Agencies laws and practices offer a more exact statutory law. Congress can never provide statutes that are specifically aimed to regulate an entire matter; hence the job is left in the hand of the administrative agencies to handle detailed statues. Such agencies fill any missing link that occurred in statutory law. Administrative agencies deal with a number of skilled employees thus they are mostly very effective. Expertise provides thoroughness in the development of business regulation. Such agencies operate on a rule of public protection. Administrative searches are easily accessible justice among the local people. However, the administrative searches also face disadvantages some of these include partiality. Many members of the administrative committee are also employees to various offices hence they are no exception from biasness and partiality towards the agency.
Administrative agencies are also battled on violation of the principle of power separation and the rule of law. The primary business of any ordinary court is adjudication; hence power transfer to administrative agencies is considered a violation. Even though we might argue that administrative agencies act upon a number of expertise some of these people may not be legal experts. Many of the members of the panel are chosen with little knowledge on their legal background. Being that these people are from all walks of life there is a possibility that they lack legal expertise.
In conclusion, the implementation of the administrative search procedure by the ACME electronic is likely to reduce the case on theft in the company by a very favorable margin. The administrative investigation process proves to be more convenient due to its advantages. The search programs are very cheap yet effective as compared to the other procedures. The reliability of the search programs can be is termed credible. As the manager, I believe that more devices will be retrieved and compensated for the implementation of the Administration search procedure. The program is fit to attain similar results for ACME Electronic as the other proposed program by my colleagues if perfectly implemented.
Work Cited.
Hans, G. S. (2018). Curing Administrative Search Decay. BUJ Sci. & Tech. L., 24, 1.
Lippert, R. K., Walby, K., & Steckle, R. (2013). Multiplicities of corporate security: Identifying emerging types, trends and issues. Security Journal, 26(3), 206-221.
Primus, E. B. (2011). Disentangling Administrative Searches. Columbia Law Review, 254-312.
Rothstein, M. A., & Rothstein, L. F. (1974). Administrative Searches and Seizures: What Happened to Camara and See. Wash. L. Rev., 50, 341.