Rav Soloveitchik: Mesira doesn't apply in democratic countries

Mesirah In Contemporary Times June 14, 2012  

Jewish Press page 57

FROM A LECTURE SERIES

BY RABBI AHARON ZIEGLER 

[...] Rav Soloveitchik had a different point of view on this matter. He said in the name of his father Rabbi Moshe Soloveitchik that the laws of mesirah simply do not apply in democratic countries. Therefore, the determination of how reliable an accusation is should be left in the hands of trained and professional law enforcement personnel and not rabbanim. 

In the haredi world, this position is viewed as marginal, but in the Modern Orthodox world this position can clearly be accepted as mainstream, or even normative.

================
Can anybody provide a specific source that backs up this assertion? The Aruch HaShulchan apparently held this view. From my Child and Domestic Abuse volume II -

Aruch HaShulchan (C.M. 388:7): Comment: It is known to all students of history that in early times in far away lands that a person had no personal security because of bandits and other forces even if these forces called themselves a government. This is still true today for some countries such in Africa where the government itself is involved in theft and robbery. In contrast the governments of Europe and in particular to our master the Czar of Russia and his ancestors and well as the government of England who have spread the protective wings of their governments in foreign lands in order to ensure the protection of the individual in such a manner that the rich do not need to hide themselves to prevent being plundered or killed. This reality of looting and killing was the reason for the halachos against informing and slandering that are found in the Talmud and poskim as we explained them. Thus these halachos only apply to someone who is an informant on others to bandits such as these and is considered a rodef (pursuer) against the person and his property and thus can be stopped even by killing.

Tzitz Eliezar (19:52): 5).....b) Even concerning the non‑Jewish courts it would appear that there is a difference between uncivilized countries and enlightened ones as is stated in the Aruch HaShulchan (C.M. 388:7): All that is written in the Talmud and poskim regarding the prohibition of moser – is referring to distance lands where a person’s life and money are not secure because of the bandits and lawless people – even though they have a government as we find in various countries such as those in Africa… as opposed to the European countries. It is obvious from the words of the Aruch HaShulchan that he truly meant this and not out of fear of the government… As I mentioned, the above was written for the general clarification of the prohibition of moser. Side point: In addition to what we have said that the essential prohibition of moser is to hand the case to a non-Jewish court, but if the times require it and it is done with the permission of the beis din – there is a basis to say it is permitted in a situation where it is not possible for the Jewish court to handle the case. We find an example of this in the Mabit (1:22) concerning the imprisonment of a heretic by the non‑Jewish government and the condition of freedom was to leave the country and to divorce his wife….