Student Bloggers

This semester I have traveled all throughout Europe, from the packed streets of Rome and Barcelona to the snowy alps in Liechtenstein. These adventures saw me staying in many different hostels and getting around almost solely through walking (only occasionally taking public transport). This experience was made much easier due to a few factors; I am a 6’2, 265 pound man who is trained in kickboxing. However, not everyone has this privilege, which begs the question: what makes one country feel more safe than another? I plan to answer this question by analyzing a government’s legal practices and judicial precedent. Specifically, Romania, and the United Kingdom are both vastly different countries in which I have been to the capitals of. Although they vary greatly in population size (Eurostat:Bucharest with 1.83m and London with 8.982m) I was still able to find similarities because capital cities all have a (relative) heightened level of policing/security. Before I begin, I just want to preface this by saying that I will not be focusing on safety statistics, as they often can be deceiving when compared to how one actually feels.

Bucharest, Romania: 

First, I will examine Romania’s legal style, and how it affects Bucharest’s feeling of safety. According to the U.S. Department of State's 2020 Country Reports on Human Rights, Romania is chalk full of both corruption and governmental human rights violations, while also having a very lackluster and ineffective judiciary. Their punishment system is also failing, as the report noted that in 2019 a total of 194 complaints against penitentiary staff had been lodged with the National Penitentiary Authority- with a staggering amount of violence against prisoners. On a similar note, the dynamic between lawyers and judges is to put it lightly, extremely unfair. Romanian Journalist and reformer Dollores Benezic explained on her own blog the issues of the Romanian legal system: trials are slanted heavily against those who can’t afford private council, lawyers often don’t have access to their client’s files due to an outdated (non-electronic) filling system, they are often poorly trained, defendants have a different lawyer for each individual trial (starting from scratch every time), and constant overcrowding in both jails and prisons. She also noted that minorities also face unfair conditions in the legal system. At face value, this all makes Romania seem very uninhabitable for any outsider, which I found a bit of validity to.

My experience saw me walking through Bucharest, with little to no knowledge of what areas were safe. Our hostel was tucked into the Jewish quarter, and was very dingy to say the least. As I walked the streets, I felt very unnerved, but couldn’t put my finger on why. The things that people typically associate with danger (tweakers, homeless, trash on the streets, etc…) were at pretty normal levels as compared to other cities, so why did this eerie feeling hang over me? Obviously I need to point out that Romania’s lack of English speakers contributes to my discomfort, but not to the overall feeling of safety. Another bias that I hold as an American is a subconscious distaste of 20th century communism, which has been drilled into my brain for 13 years of schooling. The concrete architecture and hyper capitalist compensation to bury communism in its past are things that also contribute to my uneasy feelings about Bucharest. Yet, the knowledge of how their legal system runs, especially considering their current “war on drugs” is even more unnerving in retrospect. 

Looking back there were a regular amount of addicts on the streets, but something about them was different; these people looked totally neglected. Although you can find this anywhere that drug addiction is rampant, they just had an ere of hopelessness to them. The government's focus on prosecution, and not rehabilitation definitely contributes to this heavily. Their actions with drugs are paradoxical, because the Romanian government's movement to clean up the streets from drugs has actually made them suffer worse. Although Romania doesn’t have a blatant reputation of pickpocketing (a thing that clearly makes one feel unsafe) like other European countries do, the feeling of safety there suffers due to its authoritarian legal system. Their heavy-handed prosecution and unfair trials contribute to their crisis of overcrowding in detention centers, which doesn’t help a criminal reflect or learn during their time. Thus, their laws and how they practice them contribute to a never ending cycle of crime and corruption in Romania; creating an overall poor feeling of safety that’s exacerbated by rising rates of drug abuse country wide.

London, England (UK) 

Unlike Romania, England has a much less corrupt legal system that, in comparison, works somewhat efficiently in handling crime. Once again using the U.S. Department of State's 2020 Country Reports on Human Rights, it can be concluded that the U.K. is miles ahead of many European countries (there is minimal corruption and no blatant human rights violations), but also isn’t perfect. There have been reports of mistreatment in prisons, and guards who abuse their power. Furthermore, the study noted that “12 of 14 men’s prisons in the UK had “poor or less than suitable levels of safety”. In relation to that, the overall occupancy level in prisons in England and Wales was 104.6 percent, and the majority of deaths in Britain's custody were from self harm. Now, compare this to the laws and how they are enforced, and we can see a trend in the wrong direction. In 2022 the Sentencing council’s report of the public’s confidence in sentencing and the criminal justice system found that 52 percent of respondents said they were confident that the criminal justice system is effective. Almost half of the sample size of this survey found that the legal system was not effective, which is a very significant amount: why is this? Well, according to the Tony Blair Institute For Global Change this problem has been a long time coming. For example, they note that the justice system has become so complex that many times victims will drop charges due to the monotony of it all, and judges rely on prisons to punish because they can’t put confidence in alternative methods of punishment/rehabilitation (contributing to overcrowding).

How does this relate to my feeling of safety while living in London? Greatly. One of the most prominent examples I can think of regarding the dynamic of safety in London is the areas of East London. Ever since I got my bearings, the common stereotype which I heard many times was that the eastern part of the city was dangerous no matter where you are. I have been to Stratford, Greenwich, and most importantly, Tower Hamlets. These areas are, in general, a different world compared to central London (where Arcadia is) and north London (where I lived). In Tower Hamlets, I never felt unsafe, but instead like I didn’t belong. I don’t want to be purely optimistic about this area either: drug use and crime are rampant here. Although addicts were still on the streets, it still felt safer than Bucharest, even on public transport. I believe it is because the British have a better outlet for change, as although judges are hesitant to put criminals anywhere but prison, the NHS still covers forms of rehabilitation and recovery for addicts. The main reason people feel a lack of safety in London is because of the rise in knife crime, especially if it is gang related. There has been a 60% increase in knife crime in urban areas, and it is considered to be an epidemic. However, politicians (both Labor and Conservative) use being tough on knife crime as a way to gather votes– allowing it to have preference in the legal system. In my experience, walking in the streets of East London is a mixed bag, as I feel safer than in Bucharest, but at the same time there’s always a voice telling me I may get stabbed (although extremely unlikely). It makes me feel safer that there is such a hard stance being taken on violent crime, which allows me to cope with a problem that will always exist (even if its effectiveness is trivial).

Overall 

I feel as if looking at the legal and penal system of a country is the easiest way to quantify the safety felt when there. Many factors contribute to perceived safety, but reports on a system designed to protect you will always give insight as to how safe you really are. My travels have taught me that anybody can be a victim of crime at any point, no matter where you are. The best way to avoid this is to keep your wits about you, and use common sense when interacting with those around you. To me London does feel safer than Bucharest, but it may not if you’re a woman, or black, or an immigrant, etc… . This is why looking at reports is such a great tool, as it exposes gaps in the justice systems where minorities may be underrepresented. Being abroad has allowed me to see many different ways of life, and view how the downfalls of human nature are common no matter what culture you are in. These downfalls are only corrected, and society is only made better if a government has the necessary approach to crime and punishment.