Police reforms and our lopsided concepts

Whenever a significant instance of police brutality catches attention of the public and the media there is inevitably a vociferous demand for accountability, for judicial inquiries, for reforms. As the dust settles down on the tragic episode and we are overtaken by other such happenings or events, the chorus of protesting voices dies down and we are back to business as usual.

That is how societies in countries where institutions have not taken roots react to instances of unwarranted and disproportionate use of state power against people.

Since institution-building has remained, by and large, a goal that few have struggled to accomplish, every security-related issue would need to be handled at the whims of some people in authority.

Voices have been raised in the aftermath of the tragedy of Sahiwal blasting the Police Act as if the Act encourages police personnel to act the way they did in Sahiwal. The Act was blamed as an outdated piece of law that was ‘designed to promote British Imperialist objectives’ in the subcontinent. It was called an anti-people legislation that was meant to ‘perpetuate colonial interests in India’.

Unsurprisingly, no mention was made of the specific sections of the Act that openly or tacitly authorised use of such barbaric force against innocent civilians.

It is also overlooked that most of our civil and criminal law is based on acts which were promulgated during the colonial era … the Criminal Procedure Code, Civil Procedure Code, Evidence Act, Land acquisition Act, etc etc. The fact that the Police Act of 1861 has undergone huge changes has also not been mentioned in the comments offered by analysts.

There is a naïve belief that making some perfunctory changes, motivating police officials to perform better, providing better quality leadership would help transform the police force making it worthy of the trust of the people it is mandated to serve .

In addressing the issue the example of the K-P police is always cited as if that is a model to follow for other provinces.

All such assertions betray a complete lack of knowledge of the ground realities.

Any uniformed force that wields power and authority under either the Police Act or the Criminal Procedure Code requires institutional checks and balances. The reason is simple: the forces operate all over the country in tens of thousands of police posts and police stations in cities, towns, villages across the length and breadth of Pakistan. They come into contact with people, criminals, protesters, murderers, etc on an hourly basis.

For such force to remain on track and to deliver within the framework of rules it is imperative in all civilised countries of the world to institute systems that provide well-established checks and balances.

This objective was achieved by creating at the local level the institution of District Magistrate and Sub-divisional Magistrate. The idea was to create a localised institutional control over the performance of the police so that remedial and corrective measures could be taken to rein in the police and prevent any abuse of power.

The system has worked well in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. But in this country the institution of District Magistrate and other cadres of magistracy were abolished during the reign of the last military dictator. The results are there for all to see.

It is inconceivable that any other system that does not provide for a localised oversight of the police could work in our administrative culture.

Under the District Magistrate there used to be a monthly review of all pending civil and criminal cases in the courts of the magistrates. The superintendent of police along with his colleagues and the prosecution team would sit with the District Magistrate and take stock of the overall law and order in the area as well as review progress of court cases and identify the bottlenecks hindering progress and take decisions on how to resolve issues the administration confronts on a daily basis. More importantly such meetings would ensure that there is complete coordination between the police and magistracy at all levels.

That was a pragmatic, down to earth approach that was consistent with the norms, traditions and psyche of the people on the one hand and with the dictates of law and justice on the other.

The system of magistracy provided an institutionalised framework for the criminal justice administration at the local level and has been operating, until it was dismantled by Gen Musharraf, to the satisfaction of the common man.

If the system could work smoothly in India with a population of 1.2 billion, how and why could it not deliver in Pakistan?

The plain fact is that the magistracy system was disbanded without giving it a careful thought or without weighing the pros and cons of the administrative vacuum that would soon follow. Lobbies did then operate in order to make the police completely free without any checks or controls. In a deceptive move ‘Committees’ were created to keep a watch over the performance of the police! How could those not trained in law exercise a ‘watch over’ the daily activities of a large force?

It was also not realised that in our society there is need for an empowered and effective captain of the team. Such captain of the team could with his authority and influence, intervene effectively to resolve issues in such sectors as irrigation, land acquisition, education, hospitals, village roads, tube wells in addition to taking ultimate responsibility for security, law and order and play a vital role in dealing with emergencies like floods, earthquakes, elections, charities, etc.

Sadly such a unique and precious institution was destroyed for no valid reasons. That happens when authoritarian rulers take charge if a country and take decisions driven by paranoid impulses and myopic mindsets.

Unless those institutions are restored, the goal of creating an effective and accountable police force would remain a dream. Not only that, the teeming millions would continue to wander about not knowing which door to knock at when they confront issues of excesses, corruption, incompetence or indifference at the hands of officials of such departments as electricity, water, gas, irrigation, schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, etc.

Pakistan should learn from its own failures and grave errors of judgment.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 28^th, 2019.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.