THERE are nine files on the desk of this untidy, unfriendly office underneath the airport's flight path. Each folder contains a lamentable tale of a cop with a potential problem. One officer is alleged to have behaved in a rude, discourteous manner; another has apparently been neglectful in his duty. Sadly, the remainder deal with claims of police brutality; of citizens being beaten by the fists of those paid to protect. Superintendent Mike Cartwright is shuffling these files like cards - resigned and wearily accustomed to the load of complaints. The Kowloon Complaints Against Police Office - CAPO K - is one of four main tentacles in the force's internal affairs portfolio. It is also the busiest. More than half of all claims of wrongdoing flow from this patch; a crime beat where police come into frequent contact with the public - a lively expanse of bitumen, high rise and pavement within which the potential for confrontation is acute. ''Most of our complaints are about assault,'' Mr Cartwright, CAPO K's staff officer, said, stalling for a moment as a jumbo roared overhead. ''No matter how much complaints have risen or fallen over the years, roughly half of all our complaints relate to an allegation of assault. ''This is obviously a matter of concern. ''We are always trying to educate police about how to avoid complaints; about how to walk away from confrontation. But this is going to be a gradual process. ''Things don't change overnight. Because of the stressful nature of the work our people find themselves put into, some officers might find it difficult to step back. ''But we have a duty to teach our officers to be more calm and collected in their dealings with the public.'' Welcome to Hong Kong's pilloried, tattered police complaints system. As hard as CAPO tries to defend its reputation, it sadly rules over a public relations nightmare. As much as police try to promote the prudence of investigating the conduct of their own ranks, it is perceived as a closed shop. And, as thoroughly and efficiently as the troops in this frightful cubicle in Shamshuipo are applying themselves to determining the truth behind claims of police malpractice, there persists an unavoidable temptation to just go through the motions. By definition, this system lacks credibility. Of course, matters of corruption are dealt with separately. Since 1974, the Independent Commission Against Corruption has enjoyed almost exclusive dominion over force-related graft. This leaves CAPO to examine aggravated cases between the public and police. But, because it has a low substantiation rate of roughly one to two per cent, CAPO can never escape the smear that an in-house system is a bad system. And because police are at the tiller, there will eternally be the taint of compromise. Tales of people being pressured into dropping complaints of police wrongdoing are almost legion - not to mention those investigations that seem to fall short of gleaning adequate proof. Simply put, the current system is a weight around the neck of those trying to re-invigorate the police image. During the past year, the focus on the behavioural standards of Hong Kong's police force has intensified. Such scrutiny has apparently prompted police to look at a new approach; to search for a greater semblance of impartiality. And there are palpable signs of change. Said the Director of Management and Inspection Services, Senior Assistant Commissioner Pedro Ching Kwok-hoo: ''We are not trying to improve the system of dealing with complaints for the system, in our view, is working well. ''We are trying to give the public more confidence in us; to give greater transparency.'' Soon, all CAPO interview rooms will be equipped with video recorders so statements of complainants can be better preserved. The Police Complaints Committee (PCC) - the body which tries to ensure CAPO is performing scrupulously - will next month start to interview witnesses and complainants in select matters. Once a complaint is registered, an initial assessment is made to determine if it can be informally resolved or investigated by mainstream police. It might even be given to a CAPO team dedicated to probing matters where there is a potential for criminal proceedings. If the matter is a complaint related to a court case, it will be deemed to be a sub-judice case. Initial inquiries will be made but, effectively, the allegation will not be fully investigated until the trial is resolved. Often, this will allow a judge or magistrate, with the benefit of all evidence and cross-examination, to rule on the efficacy of the claim. When CAPO finishes its investigation, it will file the recommendation to the PCC. It can fall into a number of potential boxes: sustained, not sustained, not proven - a category where the claim is suspected to be true - withdrawn, not pursuable, false and informal resolution. More than 3,000 complaints were received last year. Almost half of these are believed to be related to criminal incidents. The PCC secretariat initially examines the file. It has the option of sending it back for clarification or submitting it for approval to the PCC committee, a group of 12 independent respected citizens. The committee also has the right to accept or reject. If there is still angst over the recommendation or the evidence, police meet with the PCC to broker a solution. At this level, there is independent legal advice. So, the review process is quite exhaustive and there is scant potential for a cover-up. Indeed, the PCC chairman, Dennis Chang Khen-lee, even has power to petition the Governor in a serious matter. However, such drastic action has never been taken. ''Of course, they [CAPO] go through a certain routine; they follow a particular format,'' Mr Chang said. ''But on the whole, many of the complaints dealt with by CAPO are endorsed by us which means we accept their standards. ''For us, it is always really not quite good enough. But this makes for a bit of creative tension and I have told them that.'' Back at the Shamshuipo offices, no such tension is visible, but the apparent drudgery of processing complaints continues with vigour. On the upper floor of this drab accommodation - a threatening environment for a complainant, let alone investigators - Chief Inspector Grace Nichols oversees the administration of ''minor'' complaints. In general, these are matters like impoliteness, offensive language, neglect of duty or unnecessary use of force. Almost all of these, Mrs Nichols hopes to eliminate in informal resolution. Some complainants, however, still prefer to submit the allegation to a full and proper analysis - as is their entitlement. ''This informal resolution is helping to speed up the process - both to the satisfaction of the complainant and to us,'' Mrs Nichols said. ''It also allows us to concentrate our resources on the more serious cases.'' Downstairs is the public foyer. It is open for business between 8am and 6pm and, on average, 10 complaints are taken. There are two interview rooms. Sergeant Wai Pui-yin, a policewoman of 14 years' experience, acknowledges each call in a polite, gentle tone - providing to aggrieved citizens an invaluable first impression. Her temperament is all the more remarkable when one considers she was the recent victim of a vexatious complaint. ''I only lose my temper outside office hours,'' she remarked with a smile. ''Sometimes, I try to explain my work to my son. But it is difficult. I do this to serve the community.'' In a back room is Chief Inspector Rocky Shek Wai-wah, the commander of one of the main investigation teams. He acknowledges the fact many CAPO investigators are disliked by their own ranks; that there is pressure to perform and that in some cases there can be no winners. ''I always have a principle in my mind,'' he said, adjusting his pose, ''and it is this: that if we are in a position to identify mistakes by members of the force, then we are also in a position to rectify them. ''But then, most of these mistakes are not made deliberately.'' While the system is in the process of procedural tinkering, police workers in the field remain stoic. Indeed, CAPO is the acid test of integrity and forthrightfulness; the sort of virtues that win promotion. We have a duty to teach our officers to be more calm and collected in their dealings with the public
