& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Train the cops on crowd control

Devyani Srivastava
There is a dire need for legislation governing the management of public order by the police, along with a cooperative relationship between the police and the public.****
BANGLADESH police have once again found themselves the subject of legal scrutiny.
Police firings across three districts this week resulted in the death of five people and left many more severely injured. Violent clashes between protestors and law enforcement officials have become somewhat of a norm in the country and reflect a lack of preparation and training of officers on public order management. But the police establishment alone can hardly be blamed for this when there is no will at the political level to invest in its reform.
Given the serious challenge of public protest in Bangladesh, the absence of specific legislation on public order management is glaring. Even in contemporary Bangladesh, these issues continue to be governed by guidelines laid down in the 1861 Police Act and the 1943 Police Regulations drafted for the colonial era and are far removed from modern day principles of policing. While managing violent protests cannot, and must not, have one simple method, there remains much to be gained in following and applying international standards and principles on public order policing.
The starting point for policing public protests is the presumption in favour of facilitating peaceful assembly (Article 21, ICCPR). Public dissent and right to assemble peacefully is the hallmark of a democratic society. Participation in political rallies inculcates a sense of ownership and involvement with the political process among the people. In light of this, the decision of the Bangladesh police to ban rallies subverts the constitutional guarantee of the right to assemble (Article 37). Bangladesh is also party to various international and regional instruments which enshrine the right to peaceful assembly and freedom of association, including the UDHR, the ICCPR, and the SAARC Charter of Democracy.
Despite the typically violent nature of political rallies in the country, people still have a right to assemble and express their opinions. As Chirstof Heynes, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions, notes: "it provides a platform to those who would otherwise not be able to make their point. It follows that it should not be regulated in a way that is biased in favour of those who happen to be in power." It is the duty of the police to facilitate peaceful and orderly conduct of rallies, not restrict or hinder peaceful assembly.
The high rate of casualties which result in public rallies in Bangladesh is rather alarming and reflects a tendency of the police to control crowds by inflicting harm. This is a gross abuse of the principles governing the use of force. The duty of police and other law enforcement officials, unlike soldiers, is to protect the right to life, liberty and security of person. According to UN rules, the police can use lethal force only when there is direct or imminent threat to life, and only as a last resort. Further, the force used must never be arbitrary or excessive.
In general, the use of firearms is considered as an extreme measure; moreover, shooting indiscriminately into a crowd is never permissible and may only be targeted specifically at the person or persons constituting the threat of death or serious injury.
Even in the eventuality that the public rally becomes unruly or "unlawful" (Section 141, Bangladesh Penal Code, 1860), the principle governing use of force remains constant: "Force should only be used when it is absolutely necessary, it should be minimum and proportional to the situation and its use should be discontinued as soon as the danger to life and property subsides." Whenever use of force is necessary, it is the duty of the police to provide assistance and aid to those injured, and ensure that a relative or close friend of the injured or affected person is notified at the earliest possible opportunity.
As Heynes further notes, the main purpose behind the recognition of the supremacy of the right to life is to protect people from being killed by the state, the entity that claims and, to a large extent, exercises monopoly on the use of force.
As is true in many other South Asian countries, a complete lack of accountability is one of the key reasons why such incidents keep repeating themselves. Unless the decision of the police to fire on protestors is rigorously reviewed, and arbitrariness strictly punished, the performance of the organisation as a whole is unlikely to improve. The Bangladesh government must demonstrate its commitment to the principle of right to life. The enquiries and judicial investigation underway must review the decision of the police to fire against the test of self-defence and evaluate the police's claim that they had to fire out of absolute necessity. Moreover, it must also apply the test of proportionality, assessing whether the benefits attached to the objectives pursued outweighed the damage that resulted from such violence.
To meet international standards of accountability, it is important for the police to follow certain best practices such as identify themselves as the police, give a clear warning of their intent to use of force, and allow enough time for the warning to be observed unless it places the police at risk or creates a risk of death or serious harm to others. The use of firearms instantiy calls for additional safeguards such as submission of an incident report to the competent authorities (UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, Article 3). Moreover, to avoid arbitrary decisions or actions of officers while on duty, the decision to use force must be taken by senior office, adequately trained into making sound judgments which are later justifiable under both domestic and international laws.
Managing public protests requires the police to balance the competing rights of freedom of assembly and protest against the right to life and security. In order to avoid such loss of life, training of officers needs to be rooted in the idea that the respect for human life is fundamental.
Such incidents are a strong reminder that when the police respond in such a violent way to a call for duty, it is also a call for wider reforms in terms of increased professionalism and accountability. If the political stronghold over the police remains status quo then one can be assured that incidents like these will keep happening. As such, the development of a comprehensive system for managing public order that accords with international standards is a priority. Such incidents only remind us all that there is a dire need for legislation governing the management of public order by the police, along with a cooperative relationship between the police and the public. The writer Is Consultant, Police Reforms Programme, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative.
E-mail: devyani@humanrightslnitiative.org