Police laws in between repeals and revivals
The writer is the author of ‘Pakistan: In Between Extremism and Peace’. He tweets @alibabakhel
Though the Police Act (PA) 1861 remained enforced for 141 years, after the promulgation of Police Order (PO) 2002 either it was repealed or blatantly amended. Though a colonial recipe was replaced by an indigenous law, its complete implementation remained an unfulfilled dream.
PO 2002 was promulgated to transform the police from an instrument of repression to public service. The first time it introduced policing by objectives, policing plans, public safety, operational autonomy, functional specialisation, and coordination within the criminal justice system. Intense romance with colonial policing fabric and blind faith in the maintenance of the status quo never allowed its complete implementation hence at the altar of selfishness public safety was mercilessly compromised. Historically here in the reforms process, the public hardly remained an active partner or consultant.
Effective policing not only requires enforcement but also public engagement and consent. Increased public engagement improves crime prevention and detection. Sustainable police reforms are not possible without political ownership, de-politicisation, attitudinal change, improved public service delivery, increased financing, technological backup, public safety apparatus, more clearly defined roles and reduced number of police ranks.
After the 18th Amendment, there were expectations that the provinces will invest more in law enforcement and may reduce dependence on federal reinforcements. But Balochistan opted for PA 1861; Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa enacted Police Act (PA) 2017; while Sindh and Punjab adopted amended versions of PO 2002.
Though few inspectors general vehemently pleaded security of tenure and operational autonomy, they did not decentralise authority downwards. Security of tenure equips officers with firsthand information about geography, socio-cultural dynamics and crime patterns. Frequent transfers of police chiefs deprive them of such understanding hence instead of institutional reforms, the majority prefer to consolidate their slots.
During the last few years, Sindh experienced a repeal and revival of police laws. Shuttling in between PA 1861 and PO 2002 resulted in the adoption of PO 2002 (amendment) Bill 2019. Articles 11 and 12 (PO 2002) defines the security of tenure and procedure for the posting of Provincial Police Officer (PPO) but owing to a dysfunctional National Public Safety Commission (NPSC) and reversal of PA 1861, the stated procedures had not been followed. After the promulgation of PO 2002, some 67 PPOs have been posted in four provinces but only two in K-P completed three years. Three PPOs in Sindh, one in Punjab, one in K-P and two in Balochistan served for more than two years. Of these nine PPOs, six belonged to other provinces while the remaining three PPOs belonged to the same province, hence police chiefs from other provinces had the longest tenures. In Kenya, chapter 14 of the Constitution provides a procedure for the appointment and removal of IGP, where with the approval of the parliament IGP is appointed by the president for four years.
Effective policing cannot be carried out without administrative autonomy of police chiefs to make their teams. Section 17(4) of PA 2017 empowers the PPO to post officers up to the rank of additional inspector general. It simultaneously depoliticised the office of PPO and empowered him to make his team. However, without such powers, a PPO may administer with a fragmented chain of command.
Without accountability, the police is susceptible to human rights violations. The Police Reforms Committee recommended internal accountability branches, provincial complaint authorities and police ombudsmen. PO 2002 Article 8(2-e) provides exclusive “Police Accountability”. Article 98 and 104 provided the composition of “police complaint authorities” while Article 155 explains penalty of misconduct by police officers, however the real issue remained its implementation. Sections 6(2) and 66 (PA K-P 2017) explains the establishment of the Internal Accountability Branch, Public Complaint Section and “Regional Police Complaint Authorities. Without across the board, internal accountability police-public partnership will remain an elusive ideal.
The original PO 2002 had federal, provincial and district level bodies but K-P PA 2017 and PO 2002 amended by Sindh did not incorporate federal bodies like the NPSC, National Police Management Board (NPMB), Federal Police Complaints Authority and National Police Bureau, hence it seems disconnected from federal bodies. Though section 15(1) of K-P PA 2017 and Article 11 of Sindh Police Law mentioned the role of the NPSC for the appointment of PPO, the question arises if the provinces ignored the role of the NPSC in police laws than what is the utility of making mere references. Since Article 86(1) of PO 2002 requires that out of 12 members of the NPSC, “at least one member shall belong to each Province”. Hence police laws of K-P and Sindh shall not disconnect provincial public safety from the NPSC. Punjab is the only province that kept the federal format of PO 2002 intact. While PA 1861 opted by Balochistan is a continuity of the colonial legacy and is thus averse to institutional public safety. In 2019, Sindh revived PO 2002 (Sindh Act XI 2019) as it was from July 13, 2011, and interestingly out of the total 190 articles in PO 2002, 78 were deleted. In the adopted version of PO 2002 by Sindh the federal format i.e. the NPSC and NPMB has been deleted. Since Balochistan opted for PA 1861, K-P PA 2017 did not include the NPSC and Sindh deleted Chapter IX (NPSC), therefore a dysfunctional NPSC compromises public safety.
Here law enforcement is primarily a provincial domain, police law and criminal law are federal enactments and the police service of Pakistan is a federal cadre. Since police law directly impacts the citizens, on a few occasions the courts also tried to contribute in reforms. However, the standardisation of certain policing issues needs deliberations and consensus in the Council of Common Interests and democratic and parliamentary forums.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 18th, 2020.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.