The police is regarded as partisan, brutal, corrupt and inefficient. It has been an easy target for those who want to humiliate the Government of the day. It’s high time that the police is granted an independent status
Police Commemoration Day is observed on October 21 every year, to mark the martyrdom of policemen who were killed in ladakh in 1959. About 1,000 policemen were killed during the call of duty. However, whatever may be said, which includes condemnation, the police will remain a visible symbol of the Government.
Policemen are an easy target for those that want to humiliate the Government of the day. It is not that occasionally or may be more often, the Government too embarrasses its opponents, by directing the police to arrest or not arrest a person against whom a case is taken up for investigation. The Government may deliberately handcuff a person in police custody, merely to humiliate him. It may release or not release a person on bail.
Former Prime Minister Robert Peel is the father of ‘modern policing’ in the UK. The same model was used by the Britishers, to create the Indian police. Peel wrote that the number one principle of policing was that “the basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.”
He also added that “police, at all times should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition; that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public, who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.”
The Police Commission, set up by the British Government in India in 1902, remarked, “The police force, throughout the country, is in the most unsatisfactory conditions, that abuses are common everywhere, that this involves great injury to the people and discredit to the Government, and that the radical reforms are necessary.”
As per public estimates, the police is an agency, more to implement and enforce the objectives of the Government in power, as distinct from enforcing laws as an independent and impartial body. However, the dividing line between the objectives of the Government in power on one side, and the interests and expectations of the ruling political party on the other side gets blurred in actual practice.
Even after 69 years of independence, the police is regarded as partisan, brutal, corrupt and inefficient. Echoing and endorsing the sentiments and observations, the first Police Commission of independent India, under the leadership of Dharam Vira observed, “What the Police Commission said in 1903, appears to be more or less equally applicable to the conditions obtaining in the police force today.”
Since the police is a wing of the Government, it cannot function independently, even if the chief wants to. Unfortunately, no State Government is willing to grant functional independence to the police, despite orders from the apex court as on September 22, 2006. In fact, the Chief Justice of India remarked in July 2009, “Not a single State Government is willing to cooperate. What can we doIJ”
Various State Governments stand in contempt of court, with respect to the seven binding directions that the Supreme Court of India spelled out in 2006. These directives address core issues like transfers, tenure, separating investigation and law and order functions of the police, unwarranted influence or pressure by the State Government on police and mechanisms to deal with complaints against the police.
These directives, if implemented, can go a long way in improving the performance of one of the most vital institutions of the country. There is a strong case for the police to be given more independence from the state’s political machinery.
The Supreme Court is on record, where it stated that “many of the deficiencies in the functioning of police had arisen largely due to an overdose of unhealthy and petty political interference”, before concluding that it was important and in the interest of the nation to “insulate the police from political interference”.
Former Union Home Minister P Chidambaram had, in October 2009, sympathised with the ordinary police constable, saying that the ordinary police is the “most abused” part of the force and the “most reviled public servant”. “Police system is out-dated. Police are ill-trained, ill-equipped and ill-paid,” Mr Chidambaram had commented, talking about the challenges to internal security.
The Minister had further stated that the police constable, “who works for 12 to 14 hours a day throughout the year, is the most abused” part of the machinery. “Everyone believes that he can be bullied, or cajoled or bribed… he is the most reviled public servant.” Mr Chidambaram further added that the “self-esteem of the average policeman is very low, and this average police constable is a frontline force for internal security”. As of January 1, 2011, the country had 25 per cent vacancies in its police forces 5,01,069 vacant posts against the total sanctioned strength of 20,64,370 posts.
The other States which have failed to fill up vacancies in their police forces are Andhra Pradesh (31 per cent) with only 90,503 police personnel against the sanctioned posts of 1,31,099 posts. Bihar (28 per cent vacant) 62,500 on the job against the sanctioned strength of 85,939 posts and Gujarat (27 per cent) 64,376 policemen are on rolls against the sanctioned strength of 87,877 posts.
Uttar Pradesh has an overwhelming vacancy of 60 per cent in its police force ,as against the national average of 25 per cent even as it recorded the highest number of crime cases in any State.
This is the condition of police in India, despite tall claims made by the leaders. The citizen expects the police officers to have the wisdom of Solomon, the courage of David, the strength of Samson, the patience of Job, the leadership of Moses, the kindness of police is the visible symbol of the Government. If he had all of these, he might be a good policeman. That’s a tall order. Is it notIJ