& 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

STRAIGHT LINE

Police and the partisan grip

MUHAMMAD NURUL HUDA
Concerned citizens gathered at the capital's National Press Club to call for an end to the executive's interference in building of an independent judiciary which would facilitating democratic progress and rule of law. A former top civil servant complained that the police force has gone under partisan control due to the flawed legal system introduced by the British colonial rulers. He laid emphasis on immediate massive overhaul. The discussion meeting opined that if necessary steps like forming a police commission and amending police laws are not taken, the situation may degenerate. It was also expressed that separation of the judiciary could not establish people's rights to justice if changes in policing system were not made. Demands were made to amend the Criminal Procedure Code, Evidence Act, and also the Police Act.
In view of the above, what are the ground realities? It may be time once again to look back at past happenings to understand and appreciate the hesitancy and alleged procrastination in matters relating to substantive police reforms. The crisis of Bangladesh Police system has been inherited from the British and Pakistani periods and has never been examined seriously in independent Bangladesh. There is no denying that the paramilitary and repressive organisational features of our police impact daily on the struggles of Bangladeshi people in their fight for social, human and legal rights under the constitution, and the general and specific laws of the land.
Our police system grew in the light of colonialism’s need to establish control, coercion and surveillance over a subject population. It suited the objectives of a regime of surplus extraction. Unfortunately, public order maintenance and political intelligence collection take up most of the time of our police, with little left for crime prevention, crime detection and service provision. There are complaints that the police leadership has remained a prisoner of the political party in power at nearly all levels and has not succeeded in contributing to organisational renewal and revitalisation, research and training, and the nurturing of professional skills.
The inherited system has been expanded and strengthened and continues to perform its repressive role and political surveillance functions at the cost of its proper role. Bangladesh Police is accused of involvement in partisan politics. Internal incentives to professionalise the service, insulate it from group conflicts in society and enable it to act in a non-partisan manner do not exist. Politicians do not want to professionalise the service because control over it is central to political conflict in a polarised society.
It is worthwhile to recollect that Bangladesh was the product of a bitter and violent freedom struggle. The State adopted a written, liberal democratic constitution but retained the colonial administrative, police and judicial structures without recasting them to meet the changed situation. The repressive character of police emerged when the ruling class of a decolonised society decided to retain the inherited police organisation, ignoring justified need for change.
For the colonial rulers, crime and politics were inseparable; defiance of State authority was a serious crime and a prelude to rebellion; political resistance was a crime or a likely occasion for crime. The resources and skills developed in combating the former were freely deployed in countering the latter. The political purposes behind the origin of the subcontinental police are thus of great importance and have to be appreciated as such.
Ironically, our political leaders who occupied positions of power since 1947 were enamoured by the administrative and police system left behind, and enjoyed exercising power and authority, oblivious of their own demand of yesteryears for far-reaching administrative reforms. The periods of unconstitutional rule in Bangladesh brought out in full virulence the repressive role of the inherited police system.
Politicisation of the police has been a serious malady. Pressure has been exerted for dropping proceedings against those with political connections and also for filing trivial charges against political enemies to harass them. Local politicians, at places, even sat in the police stations to serve as a buffer between their supporters and the police. Many felt that Bangladesh had developed a dual system of justice, one through the formal channels of the criminal justice system and another through political channels.
The establishment has to realise and appreciate that politicisation of the police, its unaccountability to the people and its outdated managerial practices largely result from lack of professionalism and accountability within the organisation. Political misuse of the police has been the direct result of internal organisational problems and poor performance. One cannot, however, lay all the blame on the political class, ignoring the negative role of the police leadership.
For the British, the maintenance of their rule in India was the prime consideration. Crime control was only a secondary objective to be achieved through fear of the police. The Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code and the Evidence Act put in place a legal framework and a police force equipped for the maintenance of British rule by force. The Penal Code prioritises offences against the State and the maintenance of public order. It begins consideration of traditional crime only from Section 299 onwards. The Criminal Procedure Code begins with the 'arrest of persons' and the 'maintenance of public order and tranquility' before getting to grips with criminal procedure relating to investigation and trial.
We have to remember that the Police Act of 1861, despite its preamble, prioritises collection and communication of intelligence affecting the public peace. The prevention and detection of crime is included among the duties of the police only in section 23 of the Act. The Act further provides for punitive policing at the cost of local residents in the event of 'disturbances' and for the appointment of private persons as special police officers.
It would be relevant to remember that our political leaders have failed to introduce administrative changes in tune with the provisions of the republican Constitution of Bangladesh. The police remained distant from the people and are as disliked as before.
It is very important to note that the blanket power of superintendence vested in the government by the Police Act, 1861, is not appropriate in a democracy. Further, the role of intelligence agencies has not been redefined to protect the fundamental right to freedoms of association, expression and movement. The police in Bangladesh still keep a watch on all political activities without discrimination and exclude only the ruling party of the day, which gives them authoritarian powers antithetical to the democratic spirit.
There is no denying that in a democracy police could not be wholly autonomous, and political intervention is both inevitable and necessary to some extent. Therefore, there is a need to specify areas where government interference is justified and others where it is not. The recommendation of setting up of Security Commissions/Public Safety Commission as proposed in the new police ordinance can do this job effectively as its members are likely to be nonpolitical persons. The enactment of a new police ordinance brooks no further delay.
The writer is a columnist of The Dally Star.