The Uneven Regulation of Private Security in ASEAN Member States

Abstract

The enormity of the Belt and Road initiative means that its security requirements have the potential to exceed the capacities of both Chinese and partner-state military, security and policing forces (Arduino 2015). Accordingly, the success of the Belt and Road initiative will rely to a large extent on the capabilities of the global private security industry. But whilst these services—ranging from site, property and personal protection to surveillance, cash transportation and associated technologies—can enhance the security of Chinese overseas investments, they also pose significant risks. High levels of competition within the private security industry provides disincentives for companies and individuals to invest in expensive training. This results in low-quality services and poor working conditions, which increase the likelihood of malpractice and risks to both the businesses they protect and the public they face (Button 2008; van Steden and Sarre 2010). Furthermore, those unable to afford private security services are not only excluded from its benefits, but as a consequence face greater insecurity (Bayley and Shearing 1996). Highlighting this dilemma, the United Nations’ Handbook on State Regulation concerning Civilian Private Security Services and their Contribution to Crime Prevention and Community Safety demonstrates that effective regulatory frameworks allow states, the private sector and communities to benefit from private security services whilst mitigating against the risks they pose to safety (UNODC 2014, p. vii). Yet to date, there has been little systematic research into the operation and governance of private security services in the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (on the ‘ethnocentrism’ of policing research see Manning 2005, p. 32). This stands in stark contrast to two growing research agendas: the first on domestic private security services in other Asian states such as China (Zhong and Grabosky 2009; Arduino 2015), Japan (Yoshida 1999) and South Korea (Button et al. 2006; Nalla and Hwang 2006; Lee 2008; Kim 2015); and the second on private maritime services in the region (Liss 2007; Sciascia 2013).