Police reforms
DOEL MUKHERJEE
On November 25, 2008, Julu Yadav fought terrorists with an unwieldy .303 rifle. Elsewhere, the D.B. Marg Police station staff in the Chhatrapati Shivaji Railway Station in Mumbai, overcame heavily armed terrorists with 9 mm pistols and lathis. Several personnel were killed and injured in the encounters. A senior police inspector proudly said of his men: “We didn’t have weapons but we had guts."
These revelations after the recent Mumbai terror attacks have created a frenzy of accusations over what is wrong with our policing. Several public interest litigation petitions are again asking for the police to be better equipped even as the holistic prescriptions already given by the Supreme Court in September 2006 lie disregarded. These directives are designed to put in place a system that will: insulate the police from wrongful political interference but still keep them supervised by the political executive; ensure there is within the police establishment, a fair selection procedure based on merit and not favouritism; and ensure greater accountability of the police to the law.
Manifestos not enough
The National Democratic Alliance promised synchronisation of the ongoing schemes for modernisation of the State police forces, separation of investigation from law and order functions and promised institutionalisation of partnership policing with the community. Clearly, nothing was done which could be built upon by the next administration. The Congress made a bigger promise of a police force which would function impartially, effectively, and in a humane manner. The manifesto promised to provide for the special needs of police families, especially in education and housing. The United Progressive Alliance government didn’t bother about any promises but under pressure from the Supreme Court, in the Prakash Singh public interest litigation, created a Model Police Act which could provide guidance to the States. But, since then even the Centre itself has not taken its own advice. Nothing prevents it from putting its own house in order in the Union Territories or in the States where the same party rules even if the other States choose to lag behind.
Fight the hurdles
Opposition comes from many quarters; the bureaucracy (who feel the police must be subservient to them); politicians (because they don’t want their present unfettered power over the police to be conditioned even reasonably); and from within the police themselves many of whom are comfortable with the political patronage they enjoy. So we go on without safety and security, on the one hand, and with police violations of our rights, on the other.
Julu Yadav defended a huge railway station with an ancient .303 he hadn’t fired for years. He couldn’t get the terrorists, not because he failed. He failed to get them because he was too brave and his leadership in the force and in the government were too cowardly to face up to the needs of the nation and give up their own selfishness. No amount of draconian legislation or patriotic bombast will solve that. Ordinary citizens, who continue to face the brunt of terrorist attacks, bad policing and poor governance in this country have to wake up and ask these questions.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Open Page
