Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Dec 10, 2005
Google



New Delhi
News: Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |

New Delhi Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

Spotlight on police autonomy

Politicians should ensure objectivity in matters of law and order, observes Prashant Pandey

The political class across the board have always construed that allowing operational autonomy to the police would mean relinquishing their control over the force completely. However, going by Kerala's experiment with police autonomy in the past four years, politicians would realise that instead of completely disappearing from the scheme of things they could actually be one of the partners in a set-up that would ensure objectivity in matters of law and order.

Elaborating on Kerala's experience with autonomy at a day-long conference on police reforms -- organised by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative here this past Wednesday -- a senior police officer from the State, Jacob Punoose, underlined that autonomy did not mean complete absence of politicians from matters of policing.

It all began in 2001 when the then Chief Minister A.K. Antony announced that politicians would not interfere in the functioning of the police. It was mostly through statements made by the Chief Minister and the then Director-General of Police that the police, the people and other politicians came to know that the force was "autonomous" now.

Initially there was a sense of relief within the police establishment and the media heralded it as a great beginning. Undue and unhealthy interference from politicians, after all, was blamed for most of the ills of policing.

In due course, however, problems began to crop up. Mr. Punoose explained to the gathering that in the absence of any written mandate on what was meant by autonomy, every section concerned with policing developed its own notion. The politicians concluded that since they were not allowed to meddle in the affairs of the police there was little point in going to the police stations. This, in turn, resulted in fewer people going to police stations with their complaints as their conduit -- the politician -- was "gone".

On the other hand, while many police officers -- buoyed by the lack of unnecessary interference -- sincerely pursued their jobs, a lot many also developed a notion that they were "free". This resulted in many of them shirking their jobs. Also, a new set of anti-socials elements began appearing on the scene trying to act as conduits between the people and the police.

The State Government then set up a Police Performance Accountability Commission -- a first in the country -- in 2003 to find out what went wrong and how to stem the rot. The Commission, which was asked to look at the overall picture and not individual problems, submitted its recommendations in March early this year. It came up with several suggestions that also included measures to make the police more people friendly.

The experiment is significant in more ways than one. First, it was a politician who initiated it. Its implementation showed that absence of politicians from the scheme of things was no guarantee to good policing. Also, when the experiment ran into rough weather, it was not scrapped. That reflected a strong political will. The Commission made recommendations that indicated that involving the people -- whom politicians represent -- in policing matters was the only way ahead.

Even the State Security Commission, recommended by the National Police Commission, which was to look into the process of appointment of police chiefs and framing broad policy guidelines for the police, did not envisage a body without the Chief Minister.

Therefore, it is time politicians realised that they are not being asked to have no control over the police at all. They are also not being asked to delegate powers to a body where they do not have a say. All they are being asked to do is to share the power with other members of civil society. And "sharing power" is a term they should not find too difficult to understand in the current scenario.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail



New Delhi

News: Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Updates: Breaking News |


News Update


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |

Copyright © 2005, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu