Empirical perspectives on legal obligation and group membership: “We are ruling over you, but you are part of this we…”

The legitimacy of legal institutions, particularly the police, has consistently been linked to questions of obligation and compliance. According to procedural justice theory, when the police enforce the law in normatively appropriate ways, consensual rather than coercive policing bolsters not only their own legitimacy, but also that of the law. On this account, procedural justice promotes compliance by fostering a sense of trust, shared group membership and endeavour, whereby being law-abiding is a central part of one’s identity and self-definition. Yet, other aspects of police behaviour, and other aspects of people’s relationships with police, also promote legitimacy and motivate behaviours in relation to the law. In this chapter, we ask what it is precisely about people’s relationships with police that promotes legal obligation. We argue that legal obligation is partly shaped by consensual policing practices that encourage people to allow legal authorities to “call the shots”. This means (a) conceding and authorising the right to make orders and decisions, and (b) opening oneself up to the risk attached to engaging with police. In providing examples of the empirical processes in play here, we also seek to make links to normative accounts of the importance of fairness and the reasons why people should obey the police and legal authorities.